![\"BOMBSHELL:](\"https:\/\/news2.watchtowatch.top\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Screenshot_76-1757405340-q80-3.webp\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Senator Ted Cruz launched a blistering attack against Democratic leadership, blaming them squarely for a government shutdown that has lingered into its 29th day.<\/p>\n
According to Cruz, the shutdown is not about genuine policy negotiation but about protecting Chuck Schumer and appeasing the radical left\u2011wing of his party.<\/p>\n
Cruz argued that Democrats, under Schumer\u2019s guidance, intentionally allowed the funding for the federal government to lapse.<\/p>\n
He said their demands\u2014among them taxpayer\u2011funded healthcare for undocumented immigrants and the reversal of work requirements for able\u2011bodied adults\u2014are so extreme they have effectively triggered this standoff.<\/p>\n
In Cruz\u2019s view, this is not a simple budget dispute but a political maneuver. \u201cThis is all about political saving Chuck\u202fSchumer\u2019s rear end,\u201d Cruz declared, accusing Schumer of throwing American taxpayers under the bus in order to placate his party\u2019s base.<\/p>\n
He said: \u201cWe\u2019re on day\u00a029 of the stupidest shutdown. This is the SCHUMER Shutdown.\u201d<\/p>\n
Cruz\u2019s words reflect deep frustration over the failure of the Senate to approve even a clean funding measure, even though the House passed one.<\/p>\n
He painted the situation starkly: \u201cThe reason the government is shut down is that Chuck\u202fSchumer has a political problem. And he has a political problem from right where you\u2019re sitting right now, from New\u202fYork.\u201d Cruz went on to assert that progressives in the Democratic Party almost removed Schumer from his leadership post after an earlier decision to allow funding to continue\u2014yet now Schumer is playing to that same base by refusing to open the government.<\/p>\n
Cruz accused Democrats of hypocrisy, pointing out that when shutdowns happened under Democratic leadership in the past, they condemned the tactic. Now, he says, they are using it as a weapon for pure politics rather than public service.<\/p>\n
He warned that at some point \u201cseven or eight Democrats are going to have some sense come into them.\u201d According to Cruz, it\u2019s likely that these will be retiring Democrats\u2014those no longer worried about a primary challenge\u2014who are free to break ranks because they don\u2019t face the same pressure from the radical left\u2011wing base. In his telling, those in danger of primaries must pander to extreme positions, thus forcing the shutdown.<\/p>\n
Cruz emphasized that while the shutdown continues, essential services are still functioning, but many federal workers are going without pay. The underlying damage, he said, goes beyond the immediate. He argued the shutdown erodes public trust in government, hurts working families and veterans, and punishes taxpayers who did nothing to create the mess.<\/p>\n
Progressive influencer Deja Foxx just got crushed in Arizona\u2019s 7th Congressional District, losing by more than 40 points in a blowout that stunned far-left activists.<\/p>\n
The Associated Press called the race for 54-year-old Adelita Grijalva with only 65% of the vote counted.<\/p>\n
Grijalva, a Pima County Supervisor and daughter of the late Rep. Ra\u00fal Grijalva, won with 62% of the vote, Trending Politics\u00a0<\/p>\n
The result was a reality check for progressives hoping to replace a political dynasty with a social media star. Foxx had high-profile endorsements from David Hogg and the PAC \u201cLeaders We Deserve.\u201d<\/p>\n
She only became eligible for Congress in April.\u00a0Her campaign leaned heavily on her \u201clived experience,\u201d highlighting a childhood in Section 8 housing, dependence on food stamps, and early activism for abortion access.<\/p>\n
But it did not work. Grijalva was the clear favorite from the start, backed by Sen. Bernie Sanders, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Arizona Sens. Mark Kelly and Ruben Gallego. Her name, funding, and party support helped her cruise to victory. Foxx tried to frame the loss as a moral win.<\/p>\n
\u201cI couldn\u2019t be prouder of what we built together,\u201d she said. She talked about starting \u201calone in her bedroom\u201d and building a movement that \u201cshattered expectations.\u201d<\/p>\n
Still, the numbers tell the story.<\/p>\n
\u201cShe lost by 40,\u201d one user on X posted, quoting a Politico headline that had once suggested Foxx might have a \u201creal shot.\u201d<\/p>\n
Foxx raised over $670,000 from mostly small-dollar donors and tried to reinvent field campaigning through social media. It didn\u2019t work.<\/p>\n
Even though both candidates shared nearly identical platforms\u2014supporting Medicare for All, tribal sovereignty, environmental justice, and opposing Donald Trump\u2014voters went with the familiar name.<\/p>\n
Grijalva had decades of local roots, and it showed.\u00a0In her victory speech, she thanked her father and the voters who kept the legacy going.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis is a victory not for me, but for our community and the progressive movement my dad started in Southern Arizona more than 50 years ago,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe delivered a message rooted not just in fighting back against a dangerous and tyrannical administration\u2014but in fighting for something: for our democracy, for the dignity of working people, and for the values that truly define Southern Arizona.\u201d<\/p>\n
In New York there is an effort by progressives to primary the Democrat leader of the House.<\/p>\n
Zohran Mamdani\u2019s democratic socialist allies are reportedly considering primary challenges next year against several congressional Democrats in New York City, including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.<\/p>\n
However, a senior political advisor to Jeffries has vowed that anyone attempting to unseat the top Democrat in the House during next year\u2019s primaries will face a \u201cforceful and unrelenting\u201d response, Fox News\u00a0<\/p>\n
Mamdani, the 33-year-old Ugandan-born democratic socialist assemblyman from Queens, sent political shockwaves nationwide with his decisive victory two weeks ago over former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and nine other candidates in New York City\u2019s Democratic mayoral primary.<\/p>\n
His win marks a significant step toward potentially becoming the city\u2019s first Muslim mayor, but would also signal the Democratic Party\u2019s increasing shift to the extreme far-left.<\/p>\n
In the wake of Mamdani\u2019s primary victory in June, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) highlighted that \u201cthis movement is bigger than one person, election, city, or organization.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWe encourage all people inspired by the Zohran campaign to join their local DSA or YDSA chapter and get involved so we can continue to fight alongside Zohran and DSA elected officials across the country to create the future we all deserve,\u201d the party added.<\/p>\n
Now, following Mamdani\u2019s victory, DSA leaders are reportedly considering mounting primary challenges not only against Jeffries but also other House Democrats representing New York City districts, including Reps. Ritchie Torres, Jerry Nadler, Dan Goldman, and Yvette Clarke, Fox added.<\/p>\n
The notices went out quietly. No press conference, no televised announcement, just a three-line email landing in inboxes of immigration judges across the country. The message was brief and without explanation, but unmistakably clear: their time on the bench had ended.Roughly 50 federal immigration judges have now been dismissed, according to reports, as President Donald Trump pushes forward with his pledge not only to secure the southern border but to root out what he describes as a \u201cjudicial swamp\u201d that obstructed enforcement of immigration laws. Another 50 judges have reportedly been transferred or encouraged into retirement.The dismissals mark a dramatic escalation of Trump\u2019s efforts to reshape America\u2019s immigration system from the ground up \u2014 this time not at the border itself, but within the courtrooms responsible for handling millions of cases.With a backlog of more than three million immigration cases still clogging the system, the move has ignited a political storm.<\/p>\n
For years, conservatives have argued that immigration judges were too often sympathetic to migrants and lenient toward deportation cases, creating what they describe as a culture of \u201ccatch and release.\u201d Trump\u2019s return to the White House has put those judges directly in his crosshairs.According to El Pa\u00eds, the majority of dismissals involved judges appointed during the Obama and Biden years, many of whom were accused of consistently granting asylum requests, delaying deportation proceedings, or issuing rulings that clashed with the administration\u2019s enforcement priorities.The judges themselves have pushed back hard, calling the dismissals unfair and retaliatory. Many have gone public with allegations of political targeting, discrimination, and abuse of executive power.Yet Trump and his allies frame the purge as accountability long overdue in a system they say has operated without consequences for too long. One of the most vocal critics is Jennifer Peyton, an Obama-era appointee who joined the immigration bench in 2016. She claims she received her termination email while vacationing with her family.Peyton insists she had no disciplinary record and had even received strong performance reviews during her tenure. She believes her firing may have been linked to her decision to host a courthouse tour for Democratic Senator Dick Durbin, who has been one of Trump\u2019s fiercest opponents on immigration policy.Durbin himself called her dismissal an \u201cabuse of power\u201d and accused the administration of orchestrating a political purge. Trump\u2019s supporters, however, say Peyton represents exactly the type of judge who undermined immigration enforcement for years, granting benefits and delays to migrants that the administration considered unlawful.Another dismissed judge, Carla Espinoza of Chicago, argued that her contract was not renewed due to her gender and Hispanic background. She points to a case where she released a Mexican national who had been falsely accused of threatening the president.Homeland Security had flagged the man as a potential threat, but Espinoza ruled in his favor, calling the case \u201cunsubstantiated.” Her defenders see this as proof of her fairness; her critics say it is precisely the kind of ruling that justified her dismissal.The dismissals have also sparked whistleblower claims. Erez Reuveni, a former Department of Justice lawyer who previously defended Trump\u2019s immigration policies, says he was fired after refusing to label a deported Salvadoran as a terrorist.Reuveni admits the case had been mishandled but argues that DOJ leaders were pressuring staff to fast-track deportations regardless of due process.He now accuses the administration of \u201cmanipulating the system\u201d and bypassing judicial checks to accelerate deportation flights.To Trump\u2019s supporters, however, what Reuveni describes as manipulation is seen as long-overdue efficiency. With a backlog in the millions and growing public frustration, they argue that streamlining deportations is a necessary corrective to years of bureaucratic dysfunction.The National Association of Immigration Judges, which has long clashed with Republican administrations, says the dismissals amount to political retaliation. Its president, Matt Biggs, confirmed that about 50 judges were dismissed outright and another 50 were reassigned or nudged into retirement.Biggs claims the rest of the bench feels \u201cthreatened\u201d and uncertain about their future. He insists that judicial independence is being sacrificed for political expediency.Supporters of Trump counter that immigration judges are not Article III judges with lifetime appointments but administrative law officers within the executive branch. That distinction, they argue, makes them subject to policy direction and accountability in ways traditional judges are not.The shake-up in immigration courts reflects a broader struggle over who controls America\u2019s immigration policy: elected officials or appointed judges.During Trump\u2019s first term, immigration judges frequently clashed with the Department of Justice over asylum standards, case quotas, and expedited dockets.The result was an increasingly adversarial relationship, with many judges accusing the administration of undermining judicial independence, while administration officials accused judges of sabotaging enforcement efforts.This time, Trump is moving aggressively to eliminate that conflict by replacing judges who resist his directives. By dismissing dozens at once, he is sending a signal that resistance will no longer be tolerated.The firings also coincide with Senate confirmations of Trump-aligned officials to higher courts. Emil Bove, a senior DOJ official who has overseen immigration enforcement efforts, was recently confirmed to a federal appeals court with the backing of the Trump-friendly Senate.<\/p>\n
Democrats argue that the administration is stacking the judiciary with loyalists to rubber-stamp its policies. Republicans counter that Democrats spent years weaponizing the courts against Trump, and that the current reshaping is simply a rebalancing of judicial power.The backdrop to all of this remains the staggering immigration backlog. Under the Biden administration, immigration courts accumulated more than three million pending cases, creating wait times of years for asylum seekers and deportation proceedings.Trump officials argue that such a backlog proves the system was broken, clogged with frivolous claims and judges unwilling to issue swift deportation orders. By replacing lenient judges with stricter ones and streamlining processes, they believe they can begin cutting into the backlog.Critics worry that the rush for efficiency will come at the expense of fairness and due process, potentially deporting individuals who might otherwise have legitimate claims to stay.For many of the dismissed judges, their sudden ouster has turned them into reluctant public figures. Some have spoken out to the press, framing themselves as victims of political persecution. Others are preparing lawsuits alleging discrimination and unlawful termination.Yet the administration frames the narrative differently. To them, the judges are not martyrs but bureaucrats who put their own politics above the law. Trump\u2019s allies argue that the outcry reflects entitlement from individuals who never believed they could be held accountable.The firings are not just about immigration courts. They fit into Trump\u2019s broader promise to \u201cdrain the swamp\u201d \u2014 a campaign pledge that has become synonymous with rooting out bureaucrats seen as obstacles to his agenda.By targeting immigration judges, Trump is addressing what he views as one of the most entrenched obstacles to enforcement. For years, immigration courts have been criticized by conservatives as slow-moving, lenient, and insulated from accountability. The current shake-up sends a message that those days are over.Democrats in Congress, led by figures like Senator Dick Durbin, have decried the dismissals as dangerous politicization of the judiciary. Durbin warned that removing judges for their rulings undermines the independence of the courts and erodes public trust.Immigrant advocacy groups have echoed those concerns, warning that migrants will face a more hostile system with fewer safeguards. Lawsuits are expected in the coming months as advocacy groups seek to challenge the legality of the dismissals.Among Trump\u2019s base, however, the move is widely popular. Voters frustrated with border insecurity and prolonged immigration battles view the dismissals as proof that Trump is delivering on his promises.Polling has consistently shown that immigration is one of the top issues motivating Trump supporters. By highlighting the removal of judges seen as obstructing deportations, the administration is reinforcing its commitment to an enforcement-first agenda.The dismissal of dozens of immigration judges represents one of the most sweeping shake-ups in the federal immigration system in decades. To critics, it is an abuse of power and a political purge that undermines judicial independence. To supporters, it is accountability long overdue in a system riddled with leniency and backlog.Either way, the move underscores the Trump administration\u2019s determination to assert control over every level of immigration policy \u2014 from the border to the bench. For the judges who once believed they were untouchable, the message was clear: their authority is no longer immune from consequences.Whether the firings will ultimately reduce the backlog or withstand legal challenges remains to be seen. But one thing is certain \u2014 Trump is reshaping the immigration system not just by building walls and deploying agents, but by remaking the courts themselves.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Senator Ted Cruz launched a blistering attack against Democratic leadership, blaming them squarely for a government shutdown that has lingered into its 29th day. According to Cruz, the shutdown is not about…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":12128,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12129","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hot-news"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t