Month: March 2026

Senate Republican Leader John Thune is signaling that Republicans are ready to use every legislative tool available—including budget reconciliation, to force the SAVE America Act across the finish line, even if it means bypassing Democrat obstruction entirely.

Thune: I think that budget reconciliation, as I’ve said before, you have to have a reason to do it. And if we have reasons to do it—and we may, very well may—I think there are a number of our colleagues in the Senate—we just came out of a luncheon where this was discussed—and I think there’s a lot of support for a budget reconciliation bill.

BREAKING: Senate Leader John Thune floats a RECONCILIATION bill for the SAVE America Act, needing only 50 votes and JD Vance

“This was discussed, there is a lot of support…that’s an option. If that’s what it takes to get it across the finish line!”pic.twitter.com/pL5KJVwQ9R

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) March 24, 2026

Earlier, newly sworn-in Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin also dropped the hammer: Republicans are locking and loading the SAVE America Act for a full-steam-ahead push through budget reconciliation.

By using the reconciliation process, Republicans can bypass the typical 60-vote filibuster threshold, meaning they only need a simple majority, 50 votes plus Vice President JD Vance, to lock down our elections once and for all.

Although under the “Byrd Rule,” provisions must have a direct impact on the budget. “Extraneous” items that do not significantly impact spending or revenue are forbidden and can be stripped out.

As The Gateway Pundit reported last week, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) threw down the gauntlet, openly demanding Republicans use reconciliation to force the SAVE America Act into law.

Sen. Kennedy:
“I think we are, Mr. President—I know you are—we need to try to pass this legislation through reconciliation.

Now, you know how reconciliation works, Mr. President. It means we can pass this bill with 50 Republican votes and the Vice President to break the tie. That’s how we passed the one big, beautiful bill. I would hope to get some of my Democratic friends to support us, but we don’t have to have them.

[…]

Now, we’ve got a lot of smart lawyers in the United States Senate. Every single one of them thinks they’re ‘Oliver Wendell Scalia.’

But we’ve got a lot of other smart lawyers in America. Here’s what I’m getting at: we have yet to try going to these smart lawyers—some in the Senate and some, believe it or not, not in the Senate—and saying, “Craft us a SAVE Act that will pass muster under the Budget Control Act and can be blessed by the parliamentarian.”

Now, DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin has all but confirmed that this strategy is already in motion.

Markwayne Mullin:
Thank you. Lindsey Graham, the chairman where the reconciliation will funnel through, is committed to making sure we get reconciliation through.

If that is in some form with funding ICE, possibly backfilling from the One Big Beautiful Bill, but also, more importantly, the SAVE America Act—there’s a framework that we can use through reconciliation, paying for it and putting in some of the policies that cost money.

Because there’s nothing more important than the SAVE America Act. I mean, that’s what the American people want. Eighty percent of the population says they want only Americans voting—citizens who are registered to vote, citizens who have done it the right way.

And I believe that everybody wants election integrity. So fortunately, Lindsey Graham has said that, through reconciliation, he’s willing to put the framework out for that.

WATCH:

BREAKING: DHS Sec. Markwayne Mullin just CONFIRMED there are ongoing efforts to ram through parts of the SAVE America Act through reconciliation

And it only needs 50 votes + JD Vance

“There’s a framework that we can do through reconciliation, paying for it, put some of… pic.twitter.com/0GrQkE2bpg

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) March 24, 2026

The post BREAKING: Senate Leader John Thune Floats RECONCILIATION Plan to RAM Through SAVE America Act — Only Needs 50 Votes + VP JD Vance to BYPASS Democrat Filibuster appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

CLICK HERE TO WATCH RIGHT NOW!

The Most Exciting, Intense, High-Energy MAGA/America First Podcast in the USA!

2 Hours Daily, Monday-Friday, 6 to 8 PM Eastern, 3 to 5 PM Pacific

The post Watch Live: The WAR Zone Podcast With Wayne Allyn Root Presented by The Gateway Pundit appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The O’Keefe Media Group on Tuesday released video evidence of more California election fraud crimes.

Undercover journalists revealed that homeless people are being paid by petitioners to forge real voters’ signatures to sign ballot petitions on Skid Row.

“In Part II of Cash for Ballots, series hidden camera footage shows petition circulators paying homeless individuals $2–$3 per form to sign ballot petitions using the names and addresses of real registered voters and forging their signatures,” James O’Keefe said.

“Circulators provided printed lists of voters, assigned identities, and directed the homeless individuals exactly what to write, monitoring them to ensure the information matched so the circulators get paid,” O’Keefe said.

James O’Keefe and Cam Higby visited addresses tied to the voters’ names being used by the homeless people on Skid Row.

“One resident said the named voter had not lived at the address for nearly a decade, yet election mail was still being delivered,” O’Keefe said.

“Doesn’t live here, uh I bought this house nearly 9 years ago. The only reason I know that name, is because we still get her mail,” one resident told James O’Keefe.

“I always feel really weird when I get the voting ballot. Cause like, you know, obviously that’s fraudulent,” they said.

WATCH:

BREAKING: CALIFORNIA MASS IN-PERSON ELECTION FRAUD CRIMES CAUGHT ON CAMERA:

Recordings Show Homeless Are Paid By Petitioners To FORGE Real Voters’ Signatures To Sign Ballot Petitions On Skid Row, Thousands of Times

Disenfranchised Voters Say They Are OUTRAGED After Being Shown… pic.twitter.com/Hu0IHvphE5

— James O’Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) March 24, 2026

The White House responded to O’Keefe’s latest video.

“The Trump Administration will always take seriously any allegation that the law has been broken and is grateful for intrepid reporters working hard to bring attention to these issues,” the White House said.

TRUMP WHITE HOUSE RESPONDS TO O’KEEFE VIDEO:

“The Trump Administration will always take seriously any allegation that the law has been broken and is grateful for intrepid reporters working hard to bring attention to these issues.”@WhiteHouse @realDonaldTrump https://t.co/ZPNmIe7Zen pic.twitter.com/fqX6ttsJrM

— James O’Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) March 24, 2026

Tuesday’s drop comes after the O’Keefe Media Group last Tuesday released part one of its investigation into a California elections fraud cash for ballots scheme.

James O’Keefe and his team of journalists went undercover on Skid Row in Los Angeles posing as homeless people.

‘Petitioners’ told the undercover journalists that they are paid between $7-$10 per signature. Some of them earn up to $1,000 per day.

“California NGOs Encourage Fake Addresses To Homeless People To Sign Petitions & Register Voters, A State & Federal Felony. Footage Shows 28 Instances Of Cash Changing Hands For Ballot Signatures & Voter Registration Forms,” they said.

WATCH:

CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS FRAUD CASH FOR BALLOTS PART I: Homeless Bribed with Cash & Drugs In Exchange For Registering To Vote & Signing Election Petitions Caught On Tape Undercover On Skid Row In California.

“You can just put Pinocchio Lane.”

California NGOs Encourage Fake… pic.twitter.com/2pkylhgPY9

— James O’Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) March 17, 2026

The post BREAKING: California Election Fraud Crimes Caught on Camera: Homeless People Paid by Petitioners to Forge Real Voters’ Signatures to Sign Ballot Petitions (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Epstein and the Rothschild ties are under investigation.

Around the world, the millions of documents from the US DOJ-released ‘Epstein files’ continue to generate ripple effects affecting people and institutions connected to the late pedophile and power broker Jeffrey Epstein.

In France, financial prosecutors said that searches were conducted at several locations, including the Paris branch of Swiss private bank Edmond de Rothschild.

These searches come as part of a French investigation tied to revelations from the ‘Epstein files’.

“As you probably know, I represent the Rothschilds”

— Ariane de Rothschild, French banker https://t.co/P9brFlc0sJ pic.twitter.com/9wOpOS5cCv

— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) February 1, 2026

Associated Press reported:

“France’s national financial prosecutor’s office said searches were carried out last Friday as part of a preliminary investigation opened last month. Investigators are examining suspicions of bribery involving a foreign public official and complicity, which concerns former French diplomat Fabrice Aidan.”

BIG FISH: Head of Rothschild Swiss Bank and the CEO of World Economic Forum Caught in the Epstein Files, Showing the Astonishing Reach of Late Pedophile Among the Super Elites

France’s central office for combating corruption and tax and financial offenses is handling the case.

“Aidan emerged as a focus of the French fallout from the release of millions of U.S. Justice Department documents on Jan. 30.

French investigative outlet Mediapart reported that the files suggested Aidan provided confidential U.N. material to Epstein. Aidan has denied wrongdoing.”

“Aidan’s name reportedly appeared in over 200 documents, including emails sent to Jeffrey Epstein between 2010 and 2016 from personal and U.N. accounts, creating suspicions he shared diplomatic documents with Epstein. Aidan’s lawyer has denied wrongdoing and called for respect for the presumption of innocence.”

So far, the biggest French name caught in the Epstein net is the former Culture Minister Jack Lang, who resigned in February as head of the Arab World Institute.

Land is the subject of a tax fraud investigation opened after the release of Epstein-related documents in the United States.

Read more:

Billionaire Les Wexner Under Oath Tells Lawmakers Jeffrey Epstein Was a Financial Adviser for The Rothschild Family (VIDEO)

The post French Law Enforcement Search Swiss Bank Edmond de Rothschild in Their Epstein Investigation appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Former National Counterterrorism Center director Joe Kent is receiving backlash after saying that, if needed, he will serve as a witness for the defense in the murder trial of Charlie Kirk.

During an interview with journalist Michael Shellenberger, Joe Kent said he questions whether the lone shooter narrative explains Charlie Kirk’s assassination.

Kent shared, when he was the director of the National Counterterrorism Center, “The FBI was pretty forceful in saying we couldn’t investigate further.”

He later added that he could be called as a witness by the defense in the case of Tyler Robinson, who is accused of killing Charlie Kirk, after suggesting a foreign power may have been behind Kirk’s assassination.

When Shellenberger noted that his defense could assist Robinson’s defense, Kent responded, “Then, honestly, so be it. If it gets us to the truth.”

Joe Kent says he is skeptical that Tyler Robinson, who confessed to killing Charlie Kirk, was the lone shooter. That accusation could undermine the prosecutors’ case against Robinson. Kent says he knew of the risk before he decided to speak out. pic.twitter.com/hd6QNHw4jo

— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) March 24, 2026

Per Yahoo News:

Joe Kent says he is skeptical that Tyler Robinson, who confessed to killing Charlie Kirk, was the lone shooter. That accusation could undermine the prosecutors’ case against Robinson. Kent says he knew of the risk before he decided to speak out.

The former Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, Joe Kent, says that the FBI did not properly investigate the assassination last fall of conservative leader Charlie Kirk. “The FBI was pretty forceful in saying we couldn’t investigate further,” he told Public. “I saw no action being taken.”

Tyler Robinson confessed to killing Kirk in a text message and a note to his trans-identified romantic partner. His defense team may now be able to use Kent’s allegations that the government is suppressing evidence and did not do a proper investigation to their advantage.

Kent said he knew that he might be called as a witness before he made his statements that a “foreign nexus” may have been involved in Kirk’s assassination. “I was definitely warned of that over and over again,” said Kent. “If I end up having to play that role, then I’ll do it. It’s not something I’m seeking.” When pressed that his testimony could help the Robinson defense, Kent said, “Then, honestly, so be it. If it gets us to the truth… That’s obviously the risk I’m taking.”

In response to Kent’s statement, Charlie Kirk’s longtime producer and now co-host of the Charlie Kirk Show, Blake Neff, took to X to vent his frustration with Kent’s comments.

Neff wrote, “Tyler Robinson literally confessed to his parents, was turned in by them, and has his DNA all over the weapon used to kill Charlie.

“But some people are so obsessed with hating Israel, the same thing they are obsessed with literally every day, that they will try to help a murderer get off so they can keep pursuing their daily obsession,” added Neff.

LOOK:

Tyler Robinson literally confessed to his parents, and was turned in by them, and has his DNA all over the weapon used to kill Charlie.

But some people are so obsessed with hating Israel, the same thing they are obsessed with literally every day, that they will try to help a…

— Blake Neff (@BlakeSNeff) March 24, 2026

Andrew Kolvet, who also co-hosts the Charlie Kirk Show, said, “Joe Kent just crossed a red line, and it’s a massive betrayal of Charlie, his wife, his kids, and the entire TPUSA family.”

WATCH:

Shortly after Robinson’s arrest, the prosecutors released a probable cause affidavit detailing the evidence gathered immediately after Charlie’s assassination.

The evidence presented at that time was overwhelming.

In the months that have followed, we know the investigation has… pic.twitter.com/zD2jFMsya7

— Andrew Kolvet (@AndrewKolvet) March 24, 2026

The post Joe Kent Says He’d Testify in Charlie Kirk Murder Case, Even If It Helps Accused Assassin Tyler Robinson appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Justice Samuel Alito dismantled a key argument pushed by a left-wing immigration attorney, while directly calling out Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson for repeatedly mischaracterizing the plain language of federal asylum law.

At issue is a high-stakes case, Noem v. Al Otro Lado, centered on whether migrants who never actually enter the United States, but instead present themselves at the border, can claim they have legally “arrived in” the country for purposes of asylum eligibility.

The case stems from a Trump-era policy that allowed federal authorities to turn back migrants before they crossed into U.S. territory, a policy the administration defended as a “critical tool” to manage overwhelming surges at the southern border.

Activist groups, including Al Otro Lado, claim the policy violated federal law and created what they describe as a “humanitarian crisis” in Mexico, according to SCOTUS Blog.

But during Tuesday’s arguments, the debate took a sharp turn when Justice Alito zeroed in on what he suggested was a deliberate distortion of statutory language.

The statute in question hinges on a deceptively simple phrase: whether an asylum seeker must be “in” the United States or whether merely arriving “at” the border is enough.

8 U.S.C. § 1158 explicitly states that an “alien who is physically present in the United States or who arrives in the United States” can apply for asylum.

“Arrives in the United States” implies the person has entered U.S. territory, while “arrives at the United States” implies the person is at the threshold of entry and not necessarily inside.

Alito made it clear he believes the left is trying to blur that distinction.

Justice Alito:
It will be interesting to read the actual transcript of the oral argument, because I believe that both you and Justice Sotomayor and Justice Jackson, on several occasions, have used the phrase “arriving at.” I think you said you arrived at your house, but that’s not the term that is in the statute. Do you think there is no difference between arriving at a location and arriving in the location?

Kelsi Corkran:
Yes, thank you for the opportunity to clarify. So, we have “in the United States” and “at a port of entry.” I can explain the amendment history on how we ended up with the prepositional phrases in that order, but I think that my first-order answer is that “in” is just how you describe being in a region.

You wouldn’t say “at the United States”; you would say “in the United States.” I am arriving in Baltimore when I’m on the train as it’s coming in. I am at Penn Station when I’m in New York.

So that’s the difference in prepositional phrases, which—even if it doesn’t completely answer the question—does give you some pause to say, well, maybe “in” isn’t doing the work that the government is suggesting here, because it has to do with kind of the natural way that we talk. But the way we ended up with that order of the prepositional phrases is that the—

Justice Alito:
Well, I’m not quite sure I understand that. So, there’s been talk about knocking at the door. Do you think someone who comes to the front door of a house and knocks at the door has arrived in the house? The person may have arrived at the house.

Kelsi Corkran:
No, but that’s past tense. Are they arriving in the house?

Justice Alito:
Does a person arrive in the house when the person is not in the house and is knocking at the door, asking to be admitted to the house?

Kelsi Corkran:
Yes, I think here the door is open, the officer is standing on the other side of the threshold, and the person gets there and is ready to take the step over, right? The officers and the asylum seekers here were toe-to-toe. This was happening right at the line, and they’re about to step over. They are arriving—present tense. Once they’re inside, they’ve arrived—past tense. But we know that Congress used the present tense here.

LISTEN:

Justice Alito rips a left-wing attorney and Justices Sotomayor and Jackson for misrepresenting what the asylum statute at issue actually says. @FDRLST pic.twitter.com/3UoT05a9US

— Shawn Fleetwood (@ShawnFleetwood) March 24, 2026

The post Justice Samuel Alito SCHOOLS Left-Wing Lawyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson on the Proper Use of Prepositions in Major Border Case appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The US Senate on Tuesday confirmed the first ever Assistant Attorney General Colin McDonald to investigate fraud nationwide in a 52-47 vote.

In January, President Trump announced he nominated Colin McDonald to serve as the Assistant Attorney General for National Fraud Enforcement.

“I am pleased to nominate Colin McDonald to serve as the first ever Assistant Attorney General for National FRAUD Enforcement, a new Division at the Department of Justice, which I created to catch and stop FRAUDSTERS that have been STEALING from the American People,” Trump said.

“My Administration has uncovered Fraud schemes in States like Minnesota and California, where these thieves have stolen Hundreds of Billions of Taxpayer Dollars. Colin McDonald is a very Smart, Tough, and Highly Respected AMERICA FIRST Federal Prosecutor who has successfully delivered Justice in some of the most difficult and high stakes cases our Country has ever seen. Together, we will END THE FRAUD, and RESTORE INTEGRITY to our Federal Programs. Congratulations Colin — STOP THE SCAMS!” Trump said.

Pam Bondi congratulated Colin McDonald.

“Congratulations to Colin McDonald, an integral member of our team, on his confirmation today!” Bondi said.

“Colin is an experienced, skilled, and tough prosecutor who will continue doing incredible work to root out fraud across America. President Trump made an outstanding choice,” Bondi said.

Congratulations to Colin McDonald, an integral member of our team @thejusticedept, on his confirmation today!

Colin is an experienced, skilled, and tough prosecutor who will continue doing incredible work to root out fraud across America. President Trump made an outstanding…

— Attorney General Pamela Bondi (@AGPamBondi) March 24, 2026

The new assistant attorney general’s work will begin in Minnesota after it was revealed that Somali fraudsters stole billions of dollars of taxpayer money in various schemes.

“It has all the benefits, all the resources, all the authority of a special counsel, but with two crucial differences,” Vice President JD Vance said earlier this year to reporters in the press briefing room.

US Attorney General Pam Bondi will not be supervising Colin McDonald.

Vance continued, “Number one, it will be run out of the White House under the supervision of me and the President United States.”

“And number two, it’s actually constitutionally legitimate. As you guys may know, the special counsel statute has some major constitutional questions,” he said.

“When we get the bad guys, we want to make sure we get them permanently, and they don’t have some legal technicality they can get out of, which is why we set it up as an associate attorney general,” he said.

The post NEW: Senate Confirms First Ever Assistant Attorney General to Investigate Fraud Nationwide appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Mysterious drones are hovering over America’s most sensitive military sites, and no one in Washington seems willing to give you a straight answer.

Today on Stinchfield, we dig into alarming reports out of Barksdale Air Force Base, home to our B-52 bombers, where highly advanced drones have been spotted in restricted airspace. These are not hobbyists. These are sophisticated, coordinated, and potentially hostile.

So the obvious question is this. Why are they still flying? Why hasn’t the military taken them down? And who is behind them?

At one point, the threat was so serious that personnel at Barksdale were ordered to shelter in place. That alone should send chills down your spine. If the Pentagon knows what these are, they are not telling you. If they do not know, that may be even worse.

We also break down the Air Canada crash at LaGuardia, where the focus is now shifting toward the air traffic controller. Was this human error, system failure, or something deeper inside an aviation system already under strain?

And then, the story the media does not want to touch. The brutal murder of a Loyola University student allegedly at the hands of an illegal alien.

The reaction from Democrats is not just weak, it is disgraceful. Silence, deflection, and excuses while American families are left shattered.

This is about national security, accountability, and the truth they hope you never demand.

The post Mystery Drones Swarm U.S. Military Bases (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

A sharp and unusually public rift has opened in transatlantic relations, as German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier delivered a blunt critique of the ongoing war with Iran, marking one of the most direct European challenges to American leadership in recent years. His remarks have ignited debate not only about the conflict itself, but about Europe’s future path in a rapidly shifting global order.

Speaking before diplomats in Berlin, Steinmeier, a member of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), described the war as a “politically disastrous mistake,” arguing that it represents a fundamental break from established norms. His tone stood out in a continent where many leaders have chosen more cautious language.

“Our foreign policy does not become more convincing just because we do not call a breach of international law a breach of international law,” Steinmeier said. He added that, in his view, the war is “contrary to international law.”

The German president went further, questioning the justification for the conflict. He argued that claims of an imminent Iranian threat to U.S. targets “did not hold water,” framing the war as avoidable rather than inevitable.

Steinmeier’s intervention is significant not because of his formal powers—which are largely ceremonial—but because of the signal it sends within Germany’s political establishment. His comments reflect growing unease across Europe as the consequences of the conflict ripple outward.

At the same time, the response from Berlin has been far from unified. Chancellor Friedrich Merz has taken a more cautious approach, avoiding explicit legal judgments while acknowledging that the war raises “major questions” about Europe’s security.

This divergence highlights a broader tension within Europe: how to balance traditional alliances with an increasingly independent strategic outlook. While some leaders remain aligned with Washington, others are beginning to openly question the costs of that alignment.

From a national-conservative perspective, the episode underscores a deeper problem—Europe’s long-standing dependence on external powers for its security and strategic direction. For decades, many European governments have relied heavily on the United States, often at the expense of their own sovereignty.

Now, voices like Steinmeier’s are calling for a recalibration. He argued that Germany must reduce its reliance on the U.S., particularly in defense and technology—areas he described as central to national power.

“Germany has to apply the lessons learned from excessive dependencies,” he said, referencing the country’s earlier reliance on Russian energy. The implication is clear: dependence, whether on Moscow or Washington, carries risks.

This shift is already being felt in economic terms. Trade patterns between Germany and the United States have come under strain, with tariffs and policy disagreements reshaping long-standing relationships.

At the same time, China has re-emerged as Germany’s leading trading partner, highlighting the complexity of Europe’s global positioning. For critics of globalization, this raises further questions about whether Europe is merely swapping one dependency for another.

Steinmeier also pointed to the technological domain as a critical battleground. He warned that Europe’s reliance on U.S.-based technology companies leaves it vulnerable, both economically and politically.

“Europe as a technology hub has talent, markets, opportunities,” he said, urging the continent to build its own capabilities rather than depend on external providers. This call aligns with a broader push among European leaders for greater digital sovereignty.

The backdrop to all of this is the war with Iran itself, which has entered a volatile phase with global consequences. Energy markets have been shaken, supply chains disrupted, and security concerns heightened across multiple regions.

For many in Europe, the conflict is not just a distant geopolitical event but a direct economic and strategic challenge. Rising energy costs and instability in key trade routes have brought the realities of global conflict closer to home.

Yet the debate unfolding in Berlin is about more than the war. It reflects a growing recognition that Europe must define its own path rather than simply follow the lead of larger powers.

Steinmeier drew a striking comparison to Germany’s break with Russia following the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. He suggested that relations with the United States may now be entering a similarly irreversible phase.

“Just as there will be no going back in relations with Russia, there will be no going back in transatlantic relations to before January 20, 2025,” he said, referring to the start of President Donald Trump’s second term.

Such language would have been unthinkable just a few years ago. It reflects the extent to which global alliances are being re-evaluated in light of shifting priorities and pressures.

Importantly, Steinmeier stopped short of directly criticizing Israel, focusing his remarks instead on broader strategic and legal concerns. This careful positioning reflects the delicate balance European leaders are attempting to maintain.

Within Germany, the president’s comments are likely to intensify domestic debate. The governing coalition itself is divided, with center-left voices more critical of the war than their conservative counterparts.

Across Europe, similar divisions are emerging. Some governments emphasize solidarity with traditional allies, while others prioritize national interests and economic stability.

From a populist perspective, this moment reinforces a key argument: that nations must retain the ability to make independent decisions based on their own interests, rather than relying on external frameworks or assumptions.

The calls for greater autonomy in defense and technology are part of a broader shift toward reasserting national control. Whether this leads to a more cohesive Europe or further fragmentation remains to be seen.

What is clear is that the war in Iran has accelerated existing trends. It has exposed vulnerabilities, tested alliances, and forced governments to confront difficult questions about their future direction.

For Germany, the challenge now is translating rhetoric into policy. Reducing dependency on the United States will require significant investment and political will—neither of which can be taken for granted.

For Europe as a whole, the stakes are even higher. The continent stands at a crossroads between continued reliance on global structures and a more self-directed path rooted in sovereignty.

As the conflict continues, the debate sparked by Steinmeier’s remarks is unlikely to fade. Instead, it may mark the beginning of a broader reassessment of Europe’s place in the world.

In that sense, the significance of his speech extends beyond immediate politics. It signals a shift in mindset—one that both supporters and critics will be watching closely in the months and years ahead.

The post German President Calls Trump’s Iran War “Illegal” and a “Disastrous Mistake” appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

During a high-stakes hearing of the Subcommittee on Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action, and Federal Rights, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) dropped a series of nuclear revelations regarding the “Arctic Frost” investigation, a sweeping, clandestine operation by the Biden-era DOJ and FBI designed to spy on the political opposition.

The Gateway Pundit has been hammering this story since February, when we reported that Biden’s FBI secretly snatched the phone records of Kash Patel and Susie Wiles in 2022 and 2023 as part of deranged Special Counsel Jack Smith’s sham classified-documents probe into papers lawfully stored at Mar-a-Lago.

Joe Biden’s FBI wiretapped a privileged attorney-client call involving top Trump adviser Susie Wiles, without the consent of either party, and then attempted to bury the evidence.

Axios reporter Marc Caputo reports that the lawyer, who has not been publicly identified, denied the accusation that he approved the FBI recording.

The revelations were confirmed during the hearing titled “Arctic Frost: A Modern Watergate,” held by the Subcommittee on Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action, and Federal Rights.

Witnesses included:

• Will Chamberlain (Article III Project)
• Margot Cleveland (The Federalist)
• Christopher O’Leary (former FBI agent)

What they described was nothing short of chilling.

Cruz walked Cleveland through the scope of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation, and the numbers alone are staggering:

• Nearly 200 subpoenas issued
• Over 400 Republican individuals and organizations targeted
• Some targets had no connection to January 6
• Others didn’t even exist at the time

Cruz asked about subpoenaing toll records of members of Congress. Cleveland confirmed it raises massive Speech and Debate Clause problems. When Jack Smith tried to force AT&T to cough up Ted Cruz’s own records, AT&T flat-out refused, saying it violated the Constitution. Smith backed down like a coward and never even tried to enforce it in court.

Cleveland made it crystal clear, Smith knew well what he was doing was illegal.

Cruz then turned to the First Amendment nightmare of seizing donor lists, internal communications, and organization records. Cleveland confirmed it directly violates freedom of association, citing the Supreme Court’s NAACP precedent.

Will Chamberlain, Senior Counsel at Article III Project, delivered the knockout punch. Asked what specific crimes the “Arctic Frost” dragnet actually uncovered, Chamberlain said: “I’m not aware of any crimes that were uncovered.”

He also confirmed that the victims including the senators, donors, organizations, private citizens, would probably never have known about this secret surveillance operation had Trump not won in 2024, thanks to nondisclosure orders and the records being buried in “prohibited access files” only the FBI Director could see.

Chamberlain didn’t mince words comparing it to Watergate: “If anything, it might even be greater. I mean, the scope of this in terms of the sheer number of people and organizations affected. And as I discussed, this brazen violation of attorney-client privilege, wiretapping a phone call between Susie Wiles and her lawyer. These are egregious offenses. And if Watergate was just about a single break-in, this is effectively compound that by 200.”

WATCH:

HOLY CRAP! Senator Cruz CONFIRMED that Biden’s FBI wiretapped Susie Wiles during a PRIVILEGED CALL with her lawyer without the consent of EITHER party.

To make it HORRENDOUSLY worse, they then tried to HIDE evidence of their actions by marking the file “prohibited.”

This… pic.twitter.com/8WIg9k9ak9

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) March 24, 2026

During the hearing, Senator Mike Lee zeroed in on one of the most disturbing elements of the entire scandal: the FBI’s internal classification of key evidence as a “prohibited file.”

Lee then walked through what may be the most damning allegation yet, the recording of a 2023 phone call between Susie Wiles and her attorney.

This was a privileged legal conversation, one of the most protected forms of communication under U.S. law.

Chamberlain explained the gravity:

“There’s two interests being invaded… it’s doubly invasive because it’s supposed to be a privileged conversation.”

Joe Biden’s FBI spied on privileged conversations between President Trump’s campaign manager and her lawyer.

They spied on members of Congress.

The Deep State can still spy on YOU. pic.twitter.com/LDzYHT7VWk

— Mike Lee (@SenMikeLee) March 24, 2026

The post ‘Arctic Frost’ Scandal: Biden FBI Wiretapped Trump Adviser Susie Wiles During Privileged Attorney Call, Then Hid Evidence in “Prohibited” Files appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.