CNN’s “Inside Politics,” host Dana Bash pushed House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries aggressively on the ongoing government shutdown and questioned his party’s role in resolving the impasse.
Bash repeatedly challenged Jeffries’s narrative that Democrats were ready to negotiate, suggesting instead that the real paralysis lay within Democratic leadership’s own demands.
At one point, Bash pressed Jeffries: “You say you want to talk, but Speaker Johnson apparently hasn’t been given permission to meet with you — have you tried knocking on his door, walking down the hall?”
Jeffries responded that Republicans had cut off communication, arguing that informal meetings would not be fruitful without willingness on the part of congressional leadership.
But Bash would not let the exchange end there.
She pressed whether the Democratic proposal — which included extending Affordable Care Act subsidies and reversing GOP healthcare cuts — was negotiable, or whether it was a nonstarter.
Jeffries maintained that Democrats remained open to bipartisan solutions but insisted Republicans had gone “radio silent.”
The tension escalated when Bash framed a question in a blunt, almost confrontational tone: “You could probably take a few steps… have you tried that?”
At several junctures, Bash’s questioning seemed designed to corner Jeffries into accountability, undermining his attempt to shift blame entirely to Republicans.
She also raised the inconsistency of Jeffries’s position, pointing out that what he called “negotiable” may not actually be open to compromise if Democrats hold firm on all their demands.
Jeffries attempted to shift the blame back, saying Republicans had repeatedly tried to repeal the ACA and were unwilling to extend subsidies without structural changes.
Bash followed up by asking whether he would support a one-year extension of those subsidies if Republicans would allow it.
Jeffries demurred, saying he was not ready to accept that narrow fix without broader action.
Through the interview, Bash adopted a skeptical posture toward Jeffries’s narrative — something that conservatives seized on as evidence that even legacy media are now pushing back harder on Democratic talking points.
Conservatives applauded Bash’s refusal to act as a passive conduit for official messaging. One commentator called the moment a turning point in media deference.
Social media users echoed the sentiment: “Even leftist CNN’s Bash shuts down Jeffries’ shutdown whine — caught off guard with brutal challenge.”
The exchange also undercut Jeffries’s argument that Democrats were trying to negotiate in good faith.
Bash sought to expose whether those overtures were real or rhetorical cover.
From a conservative vantage, this marked a welcome line of questioning from mainstream media — one that forces Democratic leaders to defend their posture rather than allowing them to dominate the narrative unchallenged.
The interview ended without a clear breakthrough, but the dynamic was telling: more pressure on Jeffries, less room for him to stick to the standard talking points.
In the coming days, this exchange may be referenced by Republicans as evidence that Democratic leaders aren’t being upfront about what they’re willing or unwilling to give up in negotiations.
BREAKING: Anna Paulina Luna Claims The Biden DOJ DESTROYED…
Representative Anna Paulina Luna has leveled explosive information against the Biden Department of Justice, claiming that critical materials related to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation have been deliberately destroyed.
This assertion, if proven true, would represent one of the most damning instances of governmental obstruction and cover-up in recent history.
Luna, who chairs a congressional task force focused on federal transparency, has stated unequivocally that she possesses evidence implicating high-ranking officials in the DOJ.
According to her, these officials not only failed to disclose materials related to Epstein but actively destroyed them to conceal the extent of powerful individuals’ involvement in Epstein’s criminal network.
She introduced legislation titled the SHRED Act, aimed at imposing severe penalties on government agents who destroy or conceal federal records. The proposed bill calls for 20 years to life in prison for anyone caught eliminating evidence in cases of national significance.
“Even if they are conducting a criminal investigation, you should probably pick up the phone and call us,” Luna told Fox News. “We have been more than patient.”
These developments come amid growing conservative suspicion that the Biden administration has no interest in unmasking Epstein’s full network. The notion that key records could be gone forever only intensifies fears that justice is being buried under a bureaucratic rug.
Luna’s office has reportedly sent multiple requests to the Department of Justice demanding clarity on the handling of Epstein-related materials. So far, those inquiries have been met with either vague responses or complete silence.
The congresswoman did not mince words in her public statements, suggesting that the DOJ’s behavior constitutes a deliberate act of obstruction. If true, such actions could violate federal law and trigger an entirely new legal battle.
“The Biden DOJ has obstructed Congress, ignored subpoenas, and now appears to have destroyed critical evidence,” Luna said. “This is corruption at the highest level.”
Critics argue that this is yet another example of double standards in Washington. “Had this been a Republican-led DOJ accused of destroying documents in a child sex trafficking case, the media would be apoplectic,” one conservative commentator noted.
For years, the Epstein case has symbolized the deep rot within America’s elite circles. The financier’s suspicious death in prison and the subsequent lack of high-profile indictments have fueled accusations of a widespread cover-up.
Now, Luna’s allegations breathe new life into those concerns. If records were indeed destroyed, the implications are profound. It would mean that the DOJ, under Biden, actively shielded criminals from justice.
What’s more troubling is that these destroyed materials could have named prominent individuals—politicians, celebrities, and global financiers—who participated in or enabled Epstein’s crimes.
In this context, Luna’s SHRED Act isn’t just legislative symbolism. It is a clarion call for accountability in an era marked by elite impunity. Her bill seeks to ensure that future officials think twice before erasing truth from the historical record.
Despite Luna’s repeated calls for transparency, there has been no formal response from Attorney General Merrick Garland. The silence speaks volumes to many who believe the DOJ is stonewalling on purpose.
Meanwhile, conservative lawmakers have rallied behind Luna. A growing number of Republicans in the House and Senate are voicing support for investigations into the DOJ’s handling of Epstein evidence.
Some have even floated the idea of appointing a special counsel to probe the matter independently. Given the stakes, such a move may be the only path forward to restore public confidence.
This latest scandal further erodes the credibility of an already battered Department of Justice. From the Hunter Biden laptop fiasco to the political targeting of conservatives, the agency has been repeatedly accused of partisanship.
Now, with Epstein documents allegedly destroyed, the DOJ’s credibility is in tatters. Public trust, once broken, is hard to rebuild.
The American people deserve the truth. And if Luna’s allegations are accurate, they deserve justice, no matter how high the guilty parties sit.
BREAKING: Tom Homan Reveals an Investigation is Underway Into AOC For…
Border Czar Tom Homan confirmed that a federal investigation is underway into Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for allegedly employing a criminal illegal alien and helping others evade federal immigration authorities.
Speaking from his post as one of President Trump’s top immigration officials, Homan revealed that ICE has launched a formal probe after multiple allegations emerged against the congresswoman.
“This is a live federal investigation. We’ve asked ICE to take immediate action,” Homan said during a televised interview.
The individual in question is reportedly an undocumented alien with a criminal record, unlawfully hired by AOC’s office.
According to internal reports, the employee had multiple encounters with law enforcement and should have been deported years ago.
Homan stressed that AOC’s potential interference with ICE operations could amount to obstruction of justice.
“This goes beyond hiring an illegal alien. There’s evidence she actively helped shield this person from deportation,” he stated.
Conservative leaders are sounding the alarm, warning that this may be only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to far-left officials flouting immigration laws.
AOC has long been known for championing sanctuary cities and attacking border agents, often labeling them as “racist” and “oppressors.”
Now, critics say her reckless rhetoric has crossed over into potentially criminal behavior.
“If a sitting congresswoman used her office to harbor an illegal alien, that’s a clear violation of federal law,” Homan declared.
Sources inside ICE say agents have already gathered documentation and begun interviewing individuals connected to the case.
Evidence suggests AOC may have leveraged her political power to block enforcement action against the individual she employed.
House Republicans are demanding accountability, with several calling for a formal ethics investigation into her conduct.
“This is what happens when radicals gain power. They think the law doesn’t apply to them,” said Rep. Andy Biggs.
Democrats quickly circled the wagons, accusing Homan of launching a political smear campaign.
But Homan stood firm, reminding the public that the law is the law and political office offers no immunity from prosecution.
“This isn’t about politics. It’s about national security and public trust,” he said.
Homan emphasized that ICE agents are working independently and that the White House is not interfering in the investigation.
“We are following the facts. If those facts point to criminal activity, then action will be taken,” Homan confirmed.
Legal experts say AOC could face charges ranging from unlawful employment to obstruction of federal agents, depending on the evidence.
Citizens outraged by the news are demanding swift justice and a full public accounting of the congresswoman’s actions.
Homan urged Americans not to let political ideology blind them to the seriousness of the allegations.
“We must restore the rule of law,” he concluded. “No one, no matter how powerful, is above it.”
The wilderness often humbles even the most experienced explorers.
Its beauty lures us in, but its unpredictability reminds us we are “merely visitors in a world ruled by nature.”
During a mountain expedition, a hiker entered a cave and noticed movement in the shadows. Suddenly,
“two faintly glowing eyes were reflecting back at him,” revealing the outline of a massive bear.
His instincts screamed to run, but he remembered safety rules: stay calm, avoid sudden moves, and retreat slowly.
“The bear lifted its head and inhaled deeply,” but instead of charging, it turned and walked deeper into the darkness.
The hiker remained still, questioning why the animal spared him. Whatever the reason, the outcome was clear:
“the hiker lived to tell his story,” stepping back into sunlight with a newfound respect for the wild.
The Dark Side of Affection: When a Pet Python’s “Love” Turned Into a Deadly Warning
At first, it seemed like a charming and unusual bond — a woman and her massive yellow python, Saffron, who had been part of her life for over three years. Friends and family expressed concern about the dangers of keeping such a powerful reptile, but she brushed off their worries, convinced the snake was gentle and even affectionate.
But as time passed, Saffron’s behavior shifted in unsettling ways. The once content python stopped eating, began crawling out of its enclosure at night, and started exhibiting behaviors that left the woman both puzzled and uneasy.
Saffron would lie alongside her in bed, stretching its long body from her shoulders to her ankles, its forked tongue flicking softly across her skin. At times, it would loosely coil around her waist, almost like an embrace. She laughed it off as the snake’s way of showing “hugs” and “kisses,” refusing to see the warning signs.
However, the unusual behavior became harder to ignore. The python would spend hours motionless on the bedroom floor, seemingly focused on her every breath. More alarmingly, she began waking up to find Saffron coiled heavily across her body, its hiss jolting her fully awake. Something didn’t feel right.
Seeking clarity, she took Saffron to a reptile veterinarian. After a thorough examination and detailed questioning about the snake’s actions, the vet delivered a chilling assessment.
“This is not affection,” he explained gravely. “Pythons use these behaviors to gauge if their prey is small enough to swallow. The coiling is practice for constriction. You are dealing with a large, mature female snake — one strong enough to suffocate you. What you’re witnessing is a rehearsal for an attack.”
The vet advised immediate changes: isolate the python from direct contact, correct its feeding schedule, and ultimately, relocate it to a professional reptile facility.
That night, with new understanding and caution, the woman observed Saffron once more as it slithered onto her bed, coiling around her in the now terrifying embrace. But this time, she was fully alert. With calm resolve, she gently lifted Saffron and returned her to the secured terrarium, locking it carefully.
By the next day, she had arranged for Saffron to be transferred to a specialized reptile center where trained handlers could care for the snake safely and provide an appropriate diet.
Conclusion
What began as a seemingly innocent, even affectionate relationship between a woman and her pet python turned into a harrowing lesson about the raw instincts of wild animals. The snake’s “affection” was, in reality, a predatory behavior signaling danger — a stark reminder that even the most familiar wild creatures retain their natural instincts.
Thankfully, by recognizing the warning signs and acting decisively, both woman and python avoided a tragic outcome. Her story serves as a powerful caution to all exotic pet owners: no matter how tame a wild animalmay seem, respect for its nature and limits can be the difference between companionship and catastrophe.
James never imagined an ordinary afternoon would uncover a secret that changed his family’s life.
It began when he heard his son Liam crying in the attic, a moment that led to an unexpected discovery buried in their backyard.
Back in 2018, James and his wife Emma noticed their row of arborvitae trees had been destroyed by deer.
While inspecting the damage, James spotted a small, weathered metal box hidden between the branches.
Assuming it was an old electrical unit left behind by former owners, he ignored it. But when landscapers
later arrived to remove the damaged trees, they unearthed something far more unusual — the top of a buried structure.
Clearing away the soil, James realized it wasn’t a utility box at all but the roof of a small
underground room with metal walls and a sealed door. A strange buzzing echoed from within, heightening the mystery.
Authorities were called to investigate. When the door was finally opened, they revealed a
hidden storm shelter built in the 1950s, filled with supplies, canned food, and handwritten journals.
For James, Emma, and Liam, the find became more than history — it was a reminder
that even the most ordinary homes can hide extraordinary secrets.
On the first day of the federal government shutdown, New York City is learning just how costly its commitment to “diversity, equity, and inclusion” policies could be under President Donald Trump’s administration.
Russ Vought, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, announced Wednesday that roughly $18 billion in federal funding for two major New York City infrastructure projects has been frozen.
“Roughly $18 billion in New York City infrastructure projects have been put on hold to ensure funding is not flowing based on unconstitutional DEI principles,” Vought wrote on X. “More info to come soon.”
The projects affected are among the most significant in New York’s long-term transportation planning. One is the Hudson Tunnel Project, which would add a new passenger rail tunnel under the Hudson River, a vital corridor for Amtrak and New Jersey Transit. The other is the long-delayed Second Avenue Subway expansion, a project that has been discussed for decades and is seen as critical to easing congestion on Manhattan’s East Side.
In a follow-up post, Vought confirmed both projects are on ice, immediately sparking debate over whether the freeze was primarily about DEI or about politics.
The Associated Press noted that the timing suggested more than policy. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, has made the Hudson Tunnel Project one of his signature priorities. In 2023, Schumer locked in a $6.88 billion federal grant for the tunnel. At the time, he acknowledged the funding was partly a safeguard in case Trump returned to the White House and Republicans reclaimed the Senate.
Both of those things have now happened.
House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who represents Brooklyn, also has a stake in the projects and has been one of Trump’s most vocal opponents in Congress.
The decision to freeze funding hits directly at the priorities of both New York Democrats who are central to the shutdown fight.
CBS News highlighted how the move reverberated beyond policy debates. For Schumer and Jeffries, it was a political gut punch delivered on the same day Democrats were already facing pressure for allowing the shutdown to drag on.
The broader context is that Trump has made rolling back DEI spending a cornerstone of his second administration.
During his first term, Trump signed an executive order restricting DEI training in federal agencies, though it was later rescinded by President Joe Biden.
Now, with Trump back in office and Republicans holding a Senate majority, the administration is applying that principle to billions of dollars in federal spending.
Vought framed the decision as a matter of constitutional principle. Supporters of the freeze argued online that taxpayers should not be forced to fund projects or programs that prioritize ideological commitments over core infrastructure needs.
“This is what accountability looks like,” one Trump supporter wrote on X. “No more DEI slush funds disguised as public works.”
Critics, however, accused the White House of weaponizing federal funding to punish political opponents. Some Democrats argued that the timing — the very first day of the shutdown — made it clear the freeze was aimed squarely at Schumer and Jeffries.
“This isn’t about DEI, it’s about Donald Trump flexing power,” one Democratic strategist said.
For New Yorkers, the practical implications are serious. The Hudson Tunnel Project is part of the larger Gateway Program, which seeks to modernize a century-old rail system that millions of commuters depend on.
Delays in federal funding could set the project back years, raising costs and leaving existing tunnels vulnerable to breakdowns. The Second Avenue Subway, meanwhile, has been in the works since the 1920s and has already been plagued by delays and cost overruns.
The House Foreign Affairs Committee was packed to the rafters, anticipation thick in the air. Progressive activists, mainstream media, and congressional staffers had gathered for what was expected to be a routine hearing on refugee resettlement. Instead, they witnessed an explosive confrontation that would rock Capitol Hill, shatter reputations, and send shockwaves far beyond the Beltway.
Representative Ilhan Omar, the outspoken congresswoman from Minnesota, stood at the witness table, her designer hijab catching the television lights. She launched into a fiery attack on Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana, accusing him of representing “everything wrong with America’s past—the shameful legacy of prejudice against immigrants and Muslims.” The gallery erupted in applause, and the media readied their headlines for Kennedy’s public humiliation.
But as Omar’s voice rose, Kennedy sat quietly, taking notes with the calm precision of a seasoned prosecutor. The slight upturn at the corner of his mouth hinted that he was ready for what was to come. When Omar finally paused, Kennedy looked up, his serene expression belying the storm of evidence he was about to unleash.
“Thank you for that passionate speech about struggle and persecution, ma’am,” Kennedy began in his trademark Louisiana drawl. “You raise important points about understanding different experiences. And speaking of experiences, perhaps we should explore yours a bit more thoroughly.”
With those words, Kennedy opened a manila folder that would become the instrument of Omar’s destruction. The room fell silent as he began to lay out a meticulously documented case—one that would expose a web of fraud, corruption, and betrayal.
Kennedy’s first revelation centered on Omar’s 2009 marriage to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi. “Questions have been raised about this particular marriage,” Kennedy said, holding up documents. “Your brother.”
The committee room erupted. Supporters shouted “lies!” and “Islamophobia!” while reporters scrambled to update their stories. Kennedy remained undeterred, presenting educational records from the UK, sworn affidavits from the Somali community, and evidence that Omar, her cultural husband Ahmed Hirsi, and her legal husband Elmi all lived at the same address in Minnesota.
“In most cultures, it’s unusual for a woman to live with both her husband and her brother,” Kennedy said. “It’s even more unusual when she’s legally married to the brother, but filing taxes jointly with the other man. That’s tax fraud, ma’am. And if Elmi is indeed your brother, that’s immigration fraud—a federal crime.”
Omar’s defenses wavered. Kennedy pressed on, revealing a formal request for a DNA test she had repeatedly refused, and a damning email exchange: “Thanks for helping me get papers, sister. I’ll make sure to pay you back when I get to London.”
Kennedy’s folder seemed bottomless. He presented tax returns showing Omar had filed jointly with Hirsi while legally married to Elmi, triggering an IRS investigation. “Correcting tax fraud after the fact doesn’t make it not tax fraud,” Kennedy noted. “It just makes it admitted tax fraud.”
As the evidence mounted, Democratic committee members began to leave the room, and Omar’s supporters fell silent. Kennedy’s tone grew sharper: “Instead of coming clean, you attacked anyone who questioned you as racist and Islamophobic. You used your identity as a shield while committing crimes that would land any other American in federal prison.”
After a brief recess, Kennedy turned to campaign finance. He revealed that Omar’s campaign had paid Tim Mynett’s company over $370,000 while she was having an extramarital affair with him. After marrying Mynett, the payments increased to $1.1 million in a single year.
Kennedy produced credit card receipts, text messages, and FEC records showing campaign funds were used for romantic trips, personal expenses, and even divorce attorney fees. “You’ve turned your congressional campaign into a criminal enterprise,” Kennedy declared. “Every donor who gave you $20 thinking they were supporting progressive values was actually funding your personal enrichment scheme.”
He then called on Naim Maud, an investor defrauded by Mynett’s wine business, to testify. Maud revealed he’d been promised government contracts, only to see his money used to buy Omar and Mynett’s DC mansion. Kennedy produced financial disclosures showing Omar had profited from the scheme, making her an accessory after the fact.
Kennedy’s tone grew somber as he addressed Omar’s history of inflammatory statements about Jewish Americans and Israel. He played audio recordings and displayed deleted tweets invoking anti-Semitic tropes, including “It’s all about the Benjamins, baby,” and accusations of “dual loyalty” against Jewish members of Congress.
He played a recording from a private fundraiser where Omar said, “Jewish members of Congress… can’t be trusted on anything related to the Middle East. They have divided loyalties.”
Jewish Democrats walked out in tears. Kennedy continued, “You accuse American Jews of having dual loyalty while taking money from terrorism supporters. You claim to care about human rights while equating democracies with terrorist organizations that throw gay people off buildings and use children as human shields.”
Kennedy’s final blow centered on Omar’s infamous “some people did something” comment about September 11th. He played the full video and produced transcripts of interviews and social media posts where Omar minimized the attacks and described American foreign policy as “the real terrorism.”
He revealed WhatsApp messages in which Omar advised activists to “use their guilt against them” whenever questioned about 9/11, treating the tragedy as a political tool. Families of 9/11 victims in the gallery wept openly.
Kennedy read a statement from Omar’s own imam, condemning her rhetoric and stating, “She does not represent Islam. She represents only her own hatred and ambition.”
With the evidence overwhelming, the committee chairman announced an immediate ethics investigation and recommended Omar’s removal from all committee assignments. Jewish Democrats called for her resignation. Speaker Pelosi issued a statement demanding accountability.
Even Omar’s closest allies, including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib, released statements abandoning her. Leaked text messages revealed the “Squad” had been planning to distance themselves for weeks.
Omar, desperate and defeated, claimed she was being targeted for her identity. Kennedy’s response was swift: “Fraud isn’t a cultural practice. Stealing isn’t a religious belief. Crime doesn’t become legal just because a woman of color commits it.”
By evening, Omar’s own constituents were protesting outside her Minneapolis office. The FBI, IRS, and FEC announced investigations into immigration fraud, tax fraud, and campaign finance violations. The Congressional Progressive Caucus suspended her membership. Cable news coverage was brutal, and “Omar fraud” trended worldwide.
Senator Kennedy, reflecting on the day from his Louisiana porch, expressed no triumph. “Watching someone destroy their own life through greed and hatred is never pleasant. But sometimes you have to lance a boil to heal the body. Congress had an infection and today we began the treatment.”
As the sun set over the bayou, Kennedy’s words echoed a deeper truth: “This country gave that woman everything… she repaid it with lies and hatred. But in the end, the system worked. Truth won. That’s the America I still believe in.”