Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer Humiliated On Chamber Floor After He Tried To Pull Outrageous Anti-Trump...
Democrats have done nothing to help President Donald Trump, and majority Republicans do good things for the country since the GOP won a trifecta—the White House, House, and Senate—in the 2024 elections.
Rather, their entire political strategy has been simply to oppose whatever the president and his party want, regardless of any negative impact on the American people.
So it should come as no surprise that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Wednesday was once again trying to block Trump and Republicans regarding funding for the new Qatari-supplied Air Force One.
Trump’s new Air Force One will remain in service for now after Senate Republicans blocked an effort by Schumer to bar taxpayer funds from being used to upgrade the aircraft.
For the past year, Democrats have criticized the Boeing 747-8 luxury jet gifted to Trump by Qatar, raising concerns about the cost of retrofitting the aircraft as well as the potential security risks of using it as the president’s primary plane.
None of these concerns, however, justify holding up any effort to improve or secure the plane.
Following Trump’s remarks over the weekend about the aircraft, which the White House introduced last month as the newest addition to the Air Force One fleet, Schumer attempted to block any taxpayer funding from being allocated to the project.
The administration estimated that upgrading the aircraft, which has an estimated base value of $400 million, could cost as much as $1 billion, Fox News reported.
“The luxury jet may have come wrapped in a bow for Donald Trump, but it came with a massive price tag for the American people,” Schumer said on the Senate floor.
“Trump is asking taxpayers to fork over an estimated $1 billion to retrofit, and max out his flying palace, so it can meet the security standards of the existing Air Force One fleet,” Schumer whined.
“That, of course, we already paid for,” he continued.
“Americans can’t afford gas, can’t afford groceries, can’t afford their electric bill. But Trump thinks they can afford to fly him in style,” Schumer – who did nothing to help curb inflation during Joe Biden’s inflationary four years – added.
Schumer sought unanimous Senate approval of his Presidential Airlift Security Act on Wednesday afternoon.
The bill would have prohibited the Department of War from using federal funds to purchase, modify, restore, or maintain any aircraft previously owned by a foreign government.
The effort followed Trump’s decision, reportedly made after recommendations from the Secret Service, to return to the United States from Turkey aboard a different aircraft rather than the new Air Force One because it had not yet received key security upgrades, including countermeasures designed to defend against heat-seeking missiles.
Trump told reporters on Sunday, when asked why the deterrence systems weren’t visible on the new plane, said the aircraft “has a lot of capability, but as I understand it, in about a month or so, they’re going to send it to have it be maxed out.”
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed the decision and told reporters Monday that although the new Air Force One is “perfectly safe for the president’s travels,” it is scheduled to undergo additional upgrades and enhancements this fall that will keep the aircraft grounded for about a month.
“During that time, the president will fly on the old Air Force One,” she said.
Schumer’s effort was quickly blocked by Sen. Deb Fischer, R-Neb., who argued that the legislation extended well beyond preventing taxpayer funds from being used to upgrade the Qatari jet and could undermine the nation’s capabilities in responding to a nuclear threat.
“Unfortunately, this legislation would also apply to a different aircraft, the Survivable Air Operations Center aircraft, or SAOC,” Fischer said, per Fox.
“Those aircraft were actually purchased from Korean Air. So this legislation would hamper a crucial program that ensures presidential safety in the event of a nuclear war.”
Herridge Exposes ‘Deep State’ Figures Who Plotted Against Trump
President Trump spent his entire first term fighting political forces – seen and unseen – who didn’t want him in the White House because he was a legitimate outsider.
Over the years, there have been reports exposing who some of those players were, but now, thanks to ace investigative reporter Catherine Herridge, we are learning even more about who was involved in subverting Trump and his agenda, and which government agencies.
Herridge reported during an appearance on NewsNation’s “Katie Pavlich Tonight” last week that a senior member of former Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s Director’s Initiatives Group, known as the DIG, described a pattern in which intelligence community officials acted on the belief that they needed to protect a globalist perspective by limiting certain information provided to policymakers, including Trump.
Herridge’s comments came amid discussion of recently declassified federal documents related to intelligence assessments from 2020 concerning China’s election influence operations.
Advertisement
Those records, which were released in connection with a primetime address by Trump the prior week, included internal communications indicating that some intelligence reports had been edited to remove references linking China’s activities to the 2020 U.S. election.
One email dated Nov. 20, 2020, from a Strategic Intelligence Analyst specializing in China and North Korea assessments stated that officials had “deliberately massaged our one pending PDB (President’s Daily Brief) to avoid any direct links to the election.”
Herridge said she reviewed the declassified materials and found they were consistent with earlier whistleblower allegations that intelligence regarding China’s alleged multi-domain influence campaign—described as efforts to hinder Trump’s reelection and portray him negatively as a candidate—had been suppressed or altered.
During the interview, she also linked those findings to broader observations shared by a source within Gabbard’s investigative team.
“In the last week, I’ve been speaking with a very senior member of Director Gabbard’s investigations team known as the DIG,” she said.
“And what they told me is that they did see a pattern where there was a sense or a feeling in the intelligence community that they just knew better,” she added.
“They had to save President Trump from his own instincts, from his own tendencies, and that there was very much a globalist view. And they had to preserve a globalist view,” Herridge continued.
“So, whether it was downplaying or suppressing intelligence about the threat from China, whether it was giving a pass and calling the Hunter Biden laptop Russian disinformation, there was this level of a bureaucracy, a kind of conspiracy that was making decisions about the kind of information that should be reaching policy makers and ultimately the commander-in-chief,” the former Fox News and CBS News correspondent noted.
The DIG, established during Gabbard’s tenure, examined a range of issues, including the origins of COVID-19, Crossfire Hurricane, Anomalous Health Incidents—commonly known as Havana Syndrome—and domestic surveillance practices.
Gabbard’s team also reviewed several intelligence community assessments produced during the Biden administration, concluding that some contained analytical shortcomings, including the selective exclusion of information and an overreliance on limited sourcing.
According to Herridge, her source said the DIG identified similar patterns across multiple investigations, suggesting that decisions about what intelligence was presented to senior government officials followed a consistent approach.
Herridge also highlighted additional details from the declassified materials involving Nikki Floris, who at the time was a senior FBI official overseeing counterintelligence matters related to foreign influence operations.
The records included instant messages attributed to Floris that described internal discussions and dynamics within the FBI.
American College Students Paid Out-of-State Rates While Illegal Aliens Got Discounts — AG Todd Blanche Just Said Enough
The Department of Justice filed suit Monday against New York, Connecticut, and Vermont — three blue states that have been quietly handing illegal aliens a benefit that out-of-state American citizens don’t receive: in-state tuition and financial aid at their public universities.
Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate put it plainly: “This is a simple matter of federal law: colleges cannot provide benefits to illegal aliens that they do not provide to U.S. citizens. This Department of Justice will not tolerate American students being treated like second-class citizens in their own country.”
The legal principle at stake is not complicated. Federal immigration law has long prohibited states from giving illegal aliens benefits that aren’t equally available to American citizens. States can’t simply declare someone a “resident” because they have a local address and use that declaration to unlock subsidized tuition — especially when an American student from a neighboring state would pay full out-of-state rates at those same institutions.
Monday’s lawsuits are the 17th the DOJ has filed challenging in-state tuition for illegal aliens. The administration has now sued every state in the Second Circuit that has tried to preserve these preferences. This is a coordinated, systematic effort to enforce a law that blue states have spent years actively defying.
The economic reality of these policies deserves to be stated plainly. When an illegal alien receives in-state tuition at a New York, Connecticut, or Vermont public university, that subsidy comes from somewhere. It comes from state taxpayers and from the higher rates charged to everyone else — including American citizens from other states whose tax dollars help fund the same institutions. Illegal aliens are receiving a government benefit that American citizens are literally paying for and can’t access.
That’s not a technicality. That’s an inversion of the entire purpose of in-state tuition — which exists to reward state residents who have paid taxes and contributed to the institutions they’re using. The moment you extend in-state rates to people who are in the country illegally, you’ve transformed a benefit for contributing members of the community into an incentive for illegal border crossing.
These policies are also, as the DOJ correctly argues, a draw. When word spreads — and it does — that you can cross into the United States illegally, establish a local address, and access subsidized higher education at the expense of American taxpayers, that’s an advertisement. It’s one more entry in the long list of benefits that made the Biden open-border era so attractive to people with no legal right to be here.
May you like
The DOJ’s statement noted that Congress made clear long ago: states cannot put illegal aliens over the nation’s own citizens.
Seventeen lawsuits. The effort, as the DOJ’s statement promised, will not cease. American students first. Not second. Not equal. First.
