Karoline Leavitt, White House press secretary, will step down at the end of August to spend more time with her family, President Donald Trump announced Wednesday.
“Serving as the White House Press Secretary over the past year and a half has been the honor and adventure of a lifetime,” Leavitt wrote on X. “Since returning to the White House after the birth of my daughter, I have felt in my heart that I cannot be the best mom my two young children deserve while devoting the constant time, energy, and attention required of the White House Press Secretary — and that is why I have ultimately made the bittersweet decision to depart the White House and embark on a new chapter in my life.”
Trump called Leavitt one of his “most trusted aides” and said she would remain one of his top outside advisers and an influential Republican voice as the party campaigns in November’s midterm elections. The White House has yet to announce her successor.
Leavitt served as an assistant White House press secretary during Trump’s first administration and later as communications director for the Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York. She unsuccessfully ran for Congress in New Hampshire in 2022 before joining Trump’s 2024 campaign as its national press secretary.
(Note: The information provided here or in any related communications is for informational purposes only and should not be considered as financial advice. We do not provide personalized investment, financial, or legal advice. Gateway Pundit benefits from purchases made through our sponsors. We appreciate your support!)
In 1827, the Supreme Court settled a question most Americans have never thought to ask:
Who decides when America is in a state of “insurrection”?
Their answer: the authority “belongs exclusively to the President.” And his decision is “conclusive.”
In other words…
We don’t need a vote from Congress.
Or a sign-off from a judge.
This summer…
One man – Donald Trump – could over-rule every other branch of government – including the all-powerful “Deep State.”
It may seem impossible.
But history shows…
Meanwhile, his rivals are gearing up for a fight.
Democrat attorneys general say they’ll attack Trump in court if he dares to use this power.
We’re at the Sandy Sanders Wildlife Management Area in Beckham County where investigators found a vehicle belonging to Barry Christian, a candidate running for Oklahoma Senate, reported missing yesterday. @kforpic.twitter.com/EmoOzaty3T
At first, it was unclear if foul play was involved; however, the Oklahoma Medical Examiner ruled that Barry Christian died by suicide.
Barry Christian died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head.
Christian’s family lashed out at the Oklahoma Medical Examiner’s Office for releasing the findings without their consent.
“Our entire family has been absolutely heartbroken by this decision by the Medical Examiners Office to release this information without our consent or the investigating body’s permission. The investigators have been working very closely to solve the death of my father. Justice will be served, we will not rest until my father is avenged,” the statement read, according to News 9.
A senior Iranian official told Reuters Wednesday that there are currently no discussions between Iran and the U.S. to extend the ceasefire to the Iran War. The report comes after Turkey’s Anadolu news agency, citing anonymous Pakistani government sources, claimed Wednesday that an extension to the 60-day ceasefire under the June memorandum of understanding had been agreed to between the U.S. and Iran.
Pakistani officials also claimed Tuesday that the U.S. and Iran are approaching “some sort of arrangement” over the Strait of Hormuz. There has been no independent confirmation that the U.S. is involved at all in the talks. Qatar, Iran, and Oman have all said that the talks are bilateral between Oman and Iran. Iran has rejected the assertion that the U.S. is involved in those talks.
In a Wednesday post on Truth Social, President Donald Trump claimed, “The U.S.A. has total control over the Strait of Hormuz. I THINK WE WILL KEEP IT!”
Estimates for energy flows through the Strait of Hormuz varied. Kpler reported that traffic increased slightly through both the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab el-Mandeb on Tuesday, with a total of 14 Hormuz crossings and 40 Bab-el-Mandeb crossings recorded. Reuters, however, reported that there were only eight vessels that transited the Strait of Hormuz on Tuesday, which would be the lowest daily count since August 5.
Yemen’s Houthis attacked an Egypt-flagged ship, the Tihamah, in the Bab el-Mandeb Strait on Tuesday, Saba reported. Yemen’s transport ministry said the strikes killed at least four crew members and two first responders.
The price of Brent Crude oil was $88.75 per barrel on Wednesday morning. AAA reported the national average price of regular gas at $4.04. So far, the cost of the Iran War to the typical American household is $1,000 in rising fuel costs and taxes to support Pentagon spending, according to the chief economist of Moody’s Analytics.
Baby Gabriel was born in Texas on Wednesday after his surrogate mother bravely refused demands from his biological parents to abort him over a treatable heart condition.
His birth comes one day after Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton stepped in to secure legal protections ensuring the baby would receive life-saving care.
Immediately following his birth, the newborn was transported to the NICU for treatment of his hypoplastic left heart syndrome, a serious congenital defect that had been diagnosed at around 20 weeks of pregnancy.
WATCH:
BREAKING: Baby Gabriel HAS BEEN BORN — after Texas AG Ken Paxton intervened because the California parents tried FORCING the surrogate mother into an abortion
She got protection in Texas!
The baby is now RAPIDLY being transported for life-saving care, who was born with a… pic.twitter.com/2iofhwP9XJ
The surrogate, McKenna West, an Alaskan nurse and single mother of two, had entered into a surrogacy agreement through Worldwide Surrogacy Specialists with the California couple, identified in court documents as Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed.
The pregnancy proceeded normally until the anatomy scan revealed the diagnosis of hypoplastic left heart syndrome, in which the left side of the heart is severely underdeveloped and unable to pump oxygen-rich blood effectively.
Without intervention, the condition is typically fatal within days of birth, but it is treatable through a series of staged surgeries beginning with the Norwood procedure shortly after delivery.
Hospitals with specialized expertise, including those in Dallas, have had strong success rates with these procedures in recent years, offering the baby a substantial chance at survival and a meaningful life.
Yet, the intended parents invoked the abortion provision in their agreement and attempted to force West to terminate the pregnancy.
When doctors in Alaska declined to perform a high-risk late-term abortion, arrangements were made for her to travel for the procedure elsewhere.
West refused and saved his life.
She researched the condition, learned of the expertise available in Texas, and relocated to Dallas County seeking both the legal protections given to the unborn under Texas law and access to medical teams experienced in treating the defect.
West even offered to assume full responsibility for the child or arrange adoption, releasing the couple from further obligations, but the biological parents rejected her plea.
Instead, the “parents” pursued legal action aiming to compel her to give birth in California, where they could withhold consent for the necessary surgeries to save his life.
They wanted to let him die.
Paxton’s office stepped in the day before Baby Gabriel’s birth.
The Attorney General formally notified UT Southwestern Medical Center and Children’s Medical Center of Dallas of their legal duty to provide medically necessary, life-saving care upon birth regardless of the parentage dispute’s outcome.
Paxton filed a motion asking the district court to issue orders directing the baby’s medical care upon birth, barring his removal from the state, and setting an expedited hearing if the intended parents refuse consent for treatment.
His office also formally notified UT Southwestern Medical Center and Children’s Medical Center of Dallas of their legal obligation under Texas law to provide medically necessary, life-saving care, noting that physicians may administer emergency life-sustaining treatment without parental consent or a court order and urging the hospitals to reject any attempt to transfer the newborn out of state.
Paxton stated, “Baby Gabriel deserves a chance at life, and I will not allow anyone to unlawfully deny him medically necessary care. My office will use every tool available to protect innocent lives and ensure that every child receives the care required under Texas law.”
BREAKING: I am fighting to save an unborn child diagnosed with a treatable heart condition and am demanding that Dallas hospitals provide life-saving care. pic.twitter.com/GWjEzRqYrk
— Attorney General Ken Paxton (@KenPaxtonTX) August 11, 2026
One day later, Baby Gabriel was born, and as Fox News legal editor Kerri Urbahn reported in her coverage of the developments, the infant is already in the NICU and is expected to undergo the surgery at a facility with an outstanding track record of success with the procedure.
This struggle over a child’s right to life brings to mind the wisdom of King Solomon.
In the biblical account from the Book of Kings, two women went before the king, each claiming to be the mother of the same infant.
Solomon, seeking to find the truth, proposed cutting the child in two with a sword so that each could receive half.
The false claimant agreed to the division, revealing her indifference to the child’s survival, while the true mother cried out in horror, pleading that the baby be given whole to the other woman rather than harmed.
Solomon instantly recognized the genuine mother by her willingness to sacrifice her own claim to preserve the child’s life.
In the case of Baby Gabriel, the intended parents demanded abortion and later signaled their desire to withhold life-saving surgery after birth to kill the child because they believed him to be imperfect.
The surrogate mother who refused those demands, fled across state lines at personal risk, offered to take full responsibility herself, offered to give them custody if they would agree to save him, and fought in court for the medical interventions to make sure he would have a chance to live.
West may not be his biological mother, but she sure demonstrated the same protective love that Solomon identified as the mark of the true parent.
God bless Baby Gabriel, McKenna West, and Ken Paxton.
We are praying for his operations to be a success.
Former Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) CFO Heidi Beirich was arrested in California and hit with fraud charges on Wednesday.
Beirich oversaw the payments to the informants inside the KKK and other white supremacist groups receiving money from the SPLC.
The Justice Department in April indicted the Southern Poverty Law Center on 11 counts, including wire fraud, bank fraud and money laundering.
The SPLC was indicted for secretly funneling more than $3 million in funds to members of white supremacist and extremist groups, the DOJ said.
A grand jury in the Middle District of Alabama returned an 11-count indictment against the SPLC.
In April, Blanche said the grand jury indicted the SPLC on 6 counts of wire fraud, four counts of bank fraud, and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering.
On Wednesday, a new indictment was unsealed charging Heidi Beirich with fraud.
A former chief financial officer at the Southern Poverty Law Center has been arrested in California and for her alleged role in overseeing secret payments to informants inside of White supremacist groups, one of whom she was allegedly living with and had a romantic relationship with at the time.
The woman, Heidi Beirich, previously ran the SPLC’s project tracking hate groups in the US and allegedly “oversaw payments of donors’ money” to people inside of these hate groups, according to the indictment. Prosecutors say she shared a bank account with one of those sources, which included funds from the SPLC’s payments.
“I believe she was part of the effort to open bank accounts in completely fictitious companies’ names and make payments to individuals for reasons that that were not accurate as as described,” Attorney General Todd Blanche said at a news conference Wednesday. “This is exactly what we said would happen in a case like this, which is that our investigators and the US attorneys and the agents working the case will can keep on working it even after the initial indictment.”
US Attorney General Todd Blanche confirmed that Heidi Beirich has been arrested.
Blanche said a new indictment was unsealed, alleging Beirich participated in the scheme to open bank accounts and make payments to the white supremacist groups.
WATCH:
BREAKING: The DOJ has ARRESTED the former CFO of the Southern Poverty Law Center on FRAUD CHARGES, AG Blanche confirms
Heidi Beirich was in charge of secretly paying donor money to “White supremacist groups,” and ran SPLC’s project tracking “hate groups” in the US
Signing of the Mecca Joint Defense Agreement between Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan
Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan have signed a major, NATO-style, mutual defense agreement in Mecca, creating a new security framework among three of the Muslim world’s most influential military and political powers at a time of rapidly escalating regional instability.
The Mecca Joint Defense Agreement was signed on Friday by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, and Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, according to various reports across the international press. The ceremony took place in Islam’s holiest city, giving the pact particularly heavy symbolic weight as well as strategic significance.
According to statements released by the three governments, the agreement is intended to strengthen collective deterrence against aggression. It states that any armed attack against one of the three countries will be regarded as an attack against all of them.
“It further provides for the enhancement of all aspects of defense cooperation among the three states,” the joint statement said. The language places the agreement closer to a collective-defense arrangement than a standard cooperation memorandum.
Sharif described the pact on social media as an agreement among “three brotherly nations, united by faith, friendship and a shared resolve for peace and security.” He also called it a historic step and a “shield of peace” for the three countries and the wider Muslim community.
Erdoğan said the agreement was based on “collective deterrence” and would deepen cooperation in defense, joint defense-industry projects, and counterterrorism. He also said it reaffirmed the right of self-defense under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter.
The Turkish president added that the agreement “targets no country” and remains open to “brotherly countries” seeking regional peace and stability. A Turkish official separately described the pact as “purely defensive in nature” and “not against any specific actor.”
Saudi Arabia, for its part, also moved quickly to contain speculation about the deal’s wider meaning, saying the agreement does not represent an effort to build a military axis or a sectarian religious bloc.
“The agreement does not represent any orientation toward building a military axis or sectarian/religious bloc, and it is not linked to nuclear endeavors or an arms race,” the Saudi statement said. It added that the pact is aimed at building “sustainable self-reliant capabilities.”
The deal brings together three very different sources of power. Saudi Arabia supplies financial weight, energy influence, and centrality in the Arab and Islamic worlds.
Pakistan brings one of the largest Muslim militaries, long experience in managing escalation, and the unmistakable strategic reality of being a nuclear-armed state. Turkey adds NATO’s second-largest army, a rapidly expanding defense industry, and a growing network of military partnerships across the region.
The pact follows Saudi Arabia and Pakistan’s bilateral Strategic Mutual Defense Agreement signed in September 2025. That earlier accord already treated aggression against one country as aggression against both, deepening a decades-old security relationship between Riyadh and Islamabad.
Officials say the new trilateral agreement does not replace existing bilateral arrangements. Instead, it expands the Saudi-Pakistani framework by formally bringing Ankara into a broader structure of cooperation.
The timing is central to the agreement’s significance. Saudi Arabia is reassessing its security posture after a year of heightened regional conflict involving Iran, the United States, Israel, Yemen’s Houthis, and armed groups across the Gulf and Levant.
Saudi infrastructure and shipping have come under pressure as Iran-backed forces have expanded attacks in the Red Sea, around the Strait of Hormuz, and along the kingdom’s southern approaches. Riyadh has tried to avoid being dragged into a wider regional war, but it has also sought new ways to show that restraint does not mean vulnerability.
Reuters reported that Saudi Arabia has been building defensive partnerships to deter threats while avoiding full-scale entanglement. One Middle Eastern official put the dilemma bluntly: “Saudi Arabia’s problem is that the kingdom’s enemies know it wants to avoid war. They are abusing that.”
The Mecca pact is therefore best understood as a signal. Riyadh is telling Iran and its allied networks that Saudi Arabia is not alone, while also telling Washington that the kingdom is capable of building regional security arrangements of its own.
That does not mean the United States has been displaced. Analysts say the agreement may fit with Washington’s desire to shift more responsibility to regional allies rather than act indefinitely as the sole security guarantor.
Michael Kugelman of the Atlantic Council wrote that the agreement could help Islamabad’s relationship with the Trump administration, which wants to see “more burden-sharing from top US allies.” In that reading, the pact strengthens collective deterrence while allowing Washington to remain an integrator rather than the only shield.
For Pakistan, the agreement further embeds the country in the emerging security architecture of the Middle East. It gives Islamabad greater diplomatic relevance at a time when it has been involved in complex regional mediation and has major economic interests in Gulf stability.
Millions of Pakistani expatriates live and work in the Middle East, and the region remains essential to Pakistan’s hydrocarbon imports. The Mecca pact gives Pakistan a larger role in the security calculations of Riyadh and Ankara while enhancing its image as a serious strategic actor.
For Turkey, the agreement extends Ankara’s influence beyond its existing partnerships in Qatar, Syria, and Libya. It also creates new opportunities for Turkey’s defense industry, which has become one of the country’s most important strategic tools.
Turkish drones, air-defense systems, armored vehicles, and naval technologies have gained international attention over the past decade. Closer defense cooperation with the Saudi capital and the Pakistani military capacity could accelerate joint production, technology transfer, and arms exports.
The agreement also reflects the dramatic rehabilitation of Saudi-Turkish relations. Just a few years ago, ties were badly strained after the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi in Istanbul by alleged Saudi operatives.
Today, Erdoğan and Mohammed bin Salman are standing together in Mecca to announce a shared defense framework. That shift shows how quickly regional alignments are being remade by threats from Iran, uncertainty over American commitments and the pressures of a multipolar world.
Iran has criticized the pact. Ebrahim Rezaei, a member of Iran’s parliamentary National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, said on X that “a paper agreement with Turkey and Pakistan” would not bring Saudi Arabia security.
He argued that years of relying on the United States had also failed to protect the kingdom. The Iranian response suggests Tehran sees the agreement as a political signal, even if it publicly downplays its military consequences.
Analysts remain divided over how far the pact will go in practice. Hakan Fidan, Turkey’s foreign minister, said the agreement is technically similar to NATO’s Article 5, but would require consultations among the parties to determine the form of assistance if one state is attacked.
That consultation mechanism may prove crucial. The pact contains strong language, but collective defense can mean many things — intelligence sharing, air-defense support, weapons supply, diplomatic coordination, cyber assistance, or, in the most extreme case, military deployment.
Most analysts doubt that Turkey or Pakistan would rush into large-scale troop deployments for Saudi Arabia. Hamish Kinnear of Verisk Maplecroft said token deployments are possible, but deeper involvement in an anti-Houthi campaign is unlikely.
“More likely is increased Ankara-Islamabad-Riyadh coordination on diplomacy, weapons development, and technological transfer, with Saudi capital boosting the defense sectors of Turkey and Pakistan,” Kinnear said. That may be the pact’s most practical near-term outcome.
The agreement nevertheless changes the strategic conversation. It suggests the Middle East is moving away from a U.S.-centric security model toward a more layered system of regional alignments, transactional partnerships, and flexible deterrence.
It also carries implications beyond the Gulf. India is likely to study the pact closely because of Pakistan’s new regional leverage, while Israel will watch Turkey’s expanded defense role with growing concern amid worsening tensions with Ankara.
The pact does not yet amount to a Muslim NATO. But it is a visible step toward a Muslim-majority collective-defense mechanism centered on Saudi wealth, Turkish military industry, and Pakistani strategic depth.
The Mecca Joint Defense Agreement may not be tested immediately, and, of course, its real strength will depend on what the three governments do when the next crisis unfolds. But the message is clear that Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan are preparing for a region in which old security guarantees are no longer enough, and new blocs are beginning to take shape.
The Founding Fathers wanted to create a system of government where power comes from the people. 250 years later, we are still experiencing a power struggle that does not resemble what the framers originally intended. One major factor in this struggle is the United States Senate.
The Declaration of Independence, one of the most important documents in American history, emphasizes the rights of the American people to abolish any government that does not serve them:
“Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.“
There, in one of our founding documents, is the solution to today’s problem. Alter is the keyword. The filibuster, an archaic Senate rule, has been watered down and abused to the point that a single Senator can object and effectively close down any debate.
The United States Senate is one of the most powerful bodies in the world, often referred to as “the most deliberative body in the world.” The actual debate died decades ago. That is decades with an ”s.”
The Gateway Pundit spoke to a fed-up patriot from North Carolina, Thomas Jacob, who is turning his frustration into written stories and acting as a voice for the anger felt by the American people.
TGP spoke to lawmakers right before they left for August Recess, which raises an obvious question. How much does the Senate actually show up to work?
You can see for yourself here (image courtesy of Jacob):
By subtracting 52 Sundays and 52 Saturdays, one arrives at a total of 250 business days minus federal holidays. According to the Senate calendar (and Jacob’s calculations), the Senate is not scheduled to work for 42% of the business year. If one counts the full calendar year, Senators are not working a whopping 57% of the year.
It is no wonder the Senate cannot get any work done for the American people, because they are not even there most of the year.
The base salary for a United States Senator is $174,000 per year. Multiply that by 100 Senators, and that is $17,400,000. This does not include all of the perks that they have given to themselves. This figure does not include the Senator’s staff and their salaries.
In fact, Mitch McConnell’s Chief of Staff, Terry Carmack, reportedly makes $266,850 a year and couldn’t even give a simple update on McConnell’s health.
McConnell has been missing and hasn’t shown up to work for two months. Senators can disappear, but they and their staff still make a six-figure salary; meanwhile, the average American would be fired for missing just one day of work with no explanation.
Think of the savings for the American people, not just in terms of the Senator’s salary, but also with their staff, and the total waste of time at the American taxpayers’ expense. If the Senate is only scheduled to work half of the time, then in a six-year term, they are working less than three years.
We, the taxpayers, are paying for nothing. I propose a constitutional amendment to change a Senator’s term from six years to four years. We are simply eliminating two of the three years they are not scheduled. Senators should not complain about the idea because they would still be working only 75% of the new timeframe.
Now look at the August recess. Congress is in recess for three weeks in August, followed by two weeks in September. That is a five-week vacation at the end of summer.
The original five-week recess in the late 1700s and early 1800s was due to the extraordinarily hot and humid weather in Washington, DC, in August. This recess is unnecessary due to an invention called air conditioning, and we no longer travel by horseback and carriage.
Congress is constitutionally required to produce a budget each year. Continuing resolutions should be outlawed. Every year, the Senate adjourns for this five-week vacation, whether they have done their work or not. Just look at last year.
The budget, which had not been passed and was due on September 30, but the Senate left on vacation, knowing that the action would set up the potential for a government shutdown. The shutdown cost the American economy billions of dollars in GDP.
Millions upon millions of taxpayer dollars have been wasted. With all of the fraud and waste uncovered, the taxpayer might think that Congress would actually trim the budget.
The taxpayer would hope Congress would increase federal penalties for such actions, as well as incorporate real accountability in spending taxpayers’ dollars. The Senate cannot do either of those because they are in recess more than working.
The taxpayer really has to wonder what time their Senator actually gets to their office, and when they leave. One has to wonder, how many committee meetings and votes are scheduled for Fridays? How many Senators are on Capitol Grounds on Thursday afternoon? How many are on Capitol grounds on Fridays?
Once a United States Senator is elected for a six-year term, their constituents have no recourse to remove them until the next election. They are free to vote on their own personal biases and agendas for about four years before the next election cycle comes around.
There is no Senate Majority Leader position mentioned in the United States Constitution. That position came about around 1925. It was supposed to help smooth the passage of bills. Instead, it has become a position where one man controls the Senate. This was never the intent of the Founding Fathers.
From 1789 to 1925, a period of 136 years. Constitutionally, the leader of the Senate is the Vice President of the United States. The Founders set that in writing, and it makes logical sense.
Vice President Vance should take the gavel and his Constitutional position. He could set the schedule. He could bring needed reforms, such as removing any Senator who misses too many committee meetings from that committee. Why? First, it is their job to be present for the entire meeting, not just to show up in time for their turn to speak and then leave.
Senators up for reelection, who lose their primary, should lose their committee assignments, because they become lame ducks and remain in the Senate for months to be petty about passing a President’s agenda. Call it the “Cornyn Rule.”
The Senate ran without a “Speaker” for well over 100 years. Repeal the law creating the Speaker’s position and return to the Constitution. Think about it for a moment. Your elected representative has the same voice and authority as the other 99 Senators. No more Harry Reids. No more Mitch McConnells. No more Chuck Schumers. No more John Thunes.
The Founding Fathers never envisioned the Senate as a lifetime career. They gave us the Convention of States to correct it. Taxpayers should not have to wait six years to throw the bums out. Forget the filibuster. Reform the Senate with a Constitutional Amendment.
Three four-year terms could be a reasonable solution. There should be a caveat for the last term, meaning a right to recall your Senator, so they don’t go negative in their last term. Call it the “Tillis rule.”
To paraphrase Postman’s Motto: “Neither heat nor will of the American people nor impending government shutdown shall stay these Congressmen from their self-appointed five-week vacation.” In fact, it has become almost a 12th Commandment, written in stone (image courtesy of Jacob):
The Senate just voted in the middle of the night to adjourn for its recess with a voice vote. There is no record of who was there or how many voted. The Senate should only be able to vote “Yea” or “Nay,” and never present. (Duh, one has to be present to vote in the Senate, so they are already “Present”). Why?
The American people, the taxpayer, the voter, should demand that every vote be recorded.
A Convention of States, per the United States Constitution, should be called, and the Senate should be reformed in its entirety. Stop fretting over the filibuster and eliminate the root cause of half of our government’s obstruction.
This should also send a strong message to the House of Representatives and all government workers, reminding them exactly who they work for. the American people.
Regardless of your party affiliation and voting record, one thing we should all agree on is that the Senate is not doing its job, and its legitimacy may be called into question.
Illegal alien murders a California man one day after Contra Costa Judge Nichelle Holmes releases him. Credits: Martinez Police Department/KTVU and LinkedIn
An innocent American citizen is dead at the hands of an illegal alien with a long criminal record, thanks in no small part to a far-left California judge.
As CBS News San Francisco reported, a man was found fatally stabbed outside his home in Martinez on August 6th. Firefighters and medical personnel promptly responded, but it was too late.
The victim was identified as 68-year-old Todd Stewart.
Authorities later identified 36-year-old Marcos Iriarte-Valdez as the person responsible for the crime and arrested him at his home on August 7th.
Surveillance video released by the police and shared with local news outlets shows the moment Iriarte-Valdez stabs Stewart to death on his own lawn.
It’s truly a horrifying scene.
WATCH:
Federal authorities later confirmed Iriarte-Valdez entered this country illegally from Venezuela. Per the New York Post, he also holds Spanish citizenship.
He should never have been allowed into the country to begin with.
This Venezuelan illegal alien STABBED A FATHER TO DEATH in sanctuary California.@CAgovernor must NOT RELEASE this murderer from jail and turn him over to us so we can REMOVE him from our nation. https://t.co/N5GhEN3S5qpic.twitter.com/NeTiGSvCJc
But the news gets even more infuriating. Iriarte-Valdez had been connected to several burglary cases in Orinda back in April, but was initially released on pre-trial release.
Then, on Aug 4, police re-arrested Iriarte-Valdez for allegedly violating a home detention monitoring rule. But that still was not enough to keep him behind bars.
Contra Costa Superior Court Judge Nichelle Holmes, who was appointed by California Governor Gavin Newsom in 2024, decided to release Iriarte-Valdez on his own recognizance for some reason on August 5th.
Below is the case info and docket entry.
Here is the case info and the docket entry from Contra Costa Superior court apparently showing Marcos Eduardo Iriarte-Valdez was released on his own recognizance on August 5, 2026 by Nichelle N. Holmes pic.twitter.com/it6bMQhWdc
Stewart was then killed the next day, thanks to this ‘bleeding heart’ judicial hack.
The entire American government failed Stewart. The federal government let his killer into the country, and then judges refused to keep him behind bars even as he racked up felonies.
What a two-tiered justice system ordinary people face, particularly in blue states.
Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson has sharply criticized Spain’s mass regularization of up to a million illegal migrants, warning that Madrid’s policy risks destabilizing Europe’s borders and repeating the failures of the 2015 migration crisis.
Kristersson, who is seeking re-election next month, called the Spanish amnesty a “very bad idea” in a recent interview with The Financial Times. His comments came after Spain, under the leadership of socialist Prime Minister Sanchez, received nearly 1.2 million applications for legal status under an extraordinary regularization process.
The Swedish leader said the Spanish move caused a “pretty big outcry” at a recent summit of EU leaders. For governments that have spent years trying to tighten migration rules, amid the ongoing chaos that well over a decade of mass migration has caused, Madrid’s decision was seen as a dangerous step in the opposite direction.
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez’s government launched the process by royal decree in April. The scheme was initially presented as a way to legalize roughly 500,000 illegal migrants already living and working in Spain.
The final numbers were far higher. According to the Spanish government, 1,174,978 applications were registered by the time the process closed on June 30.
The scale of the response has intensified concern among right-leaning governments and border-control advocates across Europe who say the amnesty rewarded illegal residence, encouraged further arrivals, and placed the Schengen free-movement system under entirely avoidable pressure.
Kristersson warned that one country’s migration decision can quickly become a continental problem. In Europe’s borderless travel zone, a residency policy made in Madrid can have consequences in Stockholm, Copenhagen, Rome, and Berlin.
“It symbolizes that we still have to be very, very careful not to act in a way that could even come close to what happened in 2015,” Kristersson said. “I think Spain got the message … but it shows the vulnerability.”
The Swedish prime minister said he told Sánchez directly that he disapproved of the move. His objection was not only to Spain’s domestic policy, but to the wider message such an amnesty sends to people outside Europe, considering illegal entry.
“Having [the amnesty] also creates a possibility for you to use European territory,” Kristersson said. “That is specifically damaging for us because we know from experience that many people coming to Europe prefer to go north. Exactly that happened in 2015.”
Kristersson added that Sweden could not afford a return to uncontrolled migration. “It is not the time to get relaxed on this,” he said, warning that there is “a huge majority in Sweden” opposed to going back to the chaos of the previous decade.
The reference to 2015 carries deep political weight in Sweden. That year, 1.3 million people, many fleeing wars in Syria and Iraq, sought refuge in Europe, overwhelming reception systems and pushing governments to erect barriers across the continent. Since then, millions more have continuously flooded the continent.
Sweden accepted more migrants relative to its population than almost any other European country during that period. The country later faced major integration problems, parallel social structures, and rising gang violence that reshaped its politics.
Kristersson has governed since 2022 at the head of a center-right coalition made up of the Moderates, Christian Democrats, and Liberals, with support from the national-conservative Sweden Democrats. That arrangement marked a decisive break with Sweden’s old liberal migration consensus.
The government has since moved to tighten asylum, residency, and deportation rules. Asylum applications reportedly fell last year to their lowest level in 40 years.
Earlier this year, Sweden also tightened its immigration and citizenship policies in response to the social consequences of mass migration. Stockholm launched an inquiry into “parallel social structures” that officials say have emerged inside the country.
Education and Integration Minister Simona Mohamsson said those structures include “clans and family-based networks” that undermine the rule of law, threaten democracy, and obstruct integration. She said it was unacceptable that people in Sweden live under social control, honor-based violence, or oppression.
In June, Sweden’s parliament passed legislation phasing out permanent residence permits for people granted protection and certain relatives. The reform was presented as part of a broader effort to reduce asylum-related immigration and strengthen integration.
Swedish authorities have also introduced stricter “good conduct” requirements for residence permits. The new rules allow officials to assess whether applicants are law-abiding, honest, self-supporting, and not a threat to public order.
Such policies represent a long-overdue correction after years of open-border, head-in-the-clouds idealism. Sweden, once held up by globalists as a model of humanitarian migration, has become one of Europe’s clearest warnings about the cost of ignoring borders.
Spain’s amnesty has now become the latest flashpoint. Spain’s socialist government argues that migrants are needed for the economy, employment growth, and the long-term sustainability of an aging population.
But immigration critics say that argument turns illegal migration into a labor-market tool and treats national borders as an inconvenience. They argue that mass regularisation allows governments to legalize a crisis they failed to prevent.
The backlash intensified after a massive surge into Ceuta, Spain’s North African exclave, at the end of July. Tens of thousands of people entered from Morocco by land and sea, with many reportedly swimming around a border breakwater after social media rumors claimed Spain had opened its border.
The surge ended in tragedy. Spanish and Moroccan authorities reported more than 80 deaths on both sides of the border, including people who drowned or were crushed during chaotic attempts to cross barriers.
Spain said tens of thousands of migrants were returned during the first days of the crisis. But the images from Ceuta immediately strengthened the argument that amnesties can act as a pull factor, regardless of how governments describe them.
Italy responded by temporarily suspending its Schengen arrangements with Spain and reinstating air and sea border controls. Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and her deputies described the move as necessary for security.
France also intensified checks along its border with Spain. Finland, Denmark, and the Czech Republic supported a tougher EU response, with several governments saying Brussels should consider action against Spain within the Schengen system.
On Aug. 4, EU interior ministers called for stronger external borders, faster returns, and expanded efforts to dismantle migrant-smuggling networks. The meeting reflected a growing recognition that Europe’s migration system remains highly vulnerable to unilateral decisions by member states.
The lesson, for conservatives, is straightforward: mass amnesty does not solve illegal migration; it rewards it. Once illegal migrants believe that persistence will eventually bring legal status, every future border crisis becomes harder to control.
Pro-migration NGOs and activist networks have long pushed European governments toward regularization, expanded asylum access, and looser residency rules, producing a vast migration industry that treats illegal entry as a bureaucratic problem to be managed rather than an issue related to sovereignty and security that needs to be stopped.
Kristersson’s warning, therefore, resonates well beyond Sweden and speaks to a broader European revolt against leftist governments that make border decisions in the name of compassion while ordinary citizens are left with the social costs.
The emerging right-wing position is not merely a stricter asylum policy. It includes faster deportations, tougher residence rules, no mass amnesties, no rewards for illegal entry, and, where necessary, remigration for foreign nationals without a right to remain or those who commit serious crimes.
Sweden’s election will now unfold against that continental backdrop. Polling has shown the Social Democrats ahead, while the Sweden Democrats and Moderates remain central to the right-wing bloc’s effort to retain power.
Kristersson has defended cooperation with the Sweden Democrats, saying his side has offered voters a clear governing proposal. He has argued that similar right-leaning coalitions have already operated in countries such as Norway and Finland.
Spain’s amnesty has given his campaign a sharper message. If Sweden relaxes, he warns, the country risks returning to the uncontrolled migration pressures that transformed its politics after 2015.
BREAKING: Baby Gabriel HAS BEEN BORN — after Texas AG Ken Paxton intervened because the California parents tried FORCING the surrogate mother into an abortion
