Category Archives: government

Department of Homeland Security purchased large warehouse in West Valley, reports say

Posted on by
Reply

PHOENIX — The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) reportedly purchased a large warehouse in the West Valley last week.

According to azcentral.com, Maricopa County property records show that DHS bought a 418,400-square-foot warehouse located off Sweetwater Avenue and Dysart Road for more than $70 million in cash on January 23. The Rockefeller Group was the seller, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was also named in the sale.

Notably, a “For Sale or Lease” sign was visible on the exterior of the warehouse as recently as January 20, but it disappeared just three days later.

### Has DHS Commented on the West Valley Warehouse?

So far, DHS has not spoken publicly about what it plans to do with the warehouse. However, an unidentified ICE spokesperson told azcentral.com via email on January 26 that the agency is “actively working to expand detention space,” though there are no new detention centers to announce at this time.

The spokesperson added that ICE has new funding available to expand detention space, thanks to the recently passed “One Big Beautiful Bill.”

### Background: ICE’s Expanding Detention Efforts

In December, The Washington Post reported that ICE is attempting to speed up deportations by creating a “deliberate feeder system.” Under this plan, new detainees would be booked into processing sites before being moved to one of several large warehouses, where they would be staged for deportation.

Each warehouse is reportedly capable of holding between 5,000 and 10,000 people. One of these warehouses was expected to be located in Arizona, which aligns with reports of the recent purchase in the West Valley.
https://ktar.com/immigration/dhs-purchased-west-valley-warehouse/5814231/

Federal Reserve Chair Powell says DOJ has subpoenaed central bank, threatens criminal indictment

Posted on by
Reply

By CHRISTOPHER RUGABER, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell said Sunday that the Department of Justice has served the central bank with subpoenas and threatened it with a criminal indictment over his testimony about the Fed’s building renovations.

The move represents an unprecedented escalation in President Donald Trump’s battle with the Fed, an independent agency he has repeatedly attacked for not cutting its key interest rate as quickly as he prefers.

The subpoena relates to Powell’s testimony before the Senate Banking Committee in June regarding the Fed’s $2.5 billion renovation of two office buildings, a project that Trump criticized as excessive this summer.

In a video statement, Powell said the threat of criminal charges is a “pretext” to undermine the Fed’s independence when it comes to setting interest rates.

“This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions — or whether instead monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation,” Powell said.

The Justice Department, in a statement Sunday, said it cannot comment on any particular case but added that Attorney General Pam Bondi “has instructed her US Attorneys to prioritize investigating any abuse of taxpayer dollars.”

A spokesperson for U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s office did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The potential indictment has already drawn concern from one Republican senator, who said he will oppose any future nominee to the central bank—including any replacement for Powell—until “this legal matter is fully resolved.”

“If there were any remaining doubt whether advisers within the Trump Administration are actively pushing to end the independence of the Federal Reserve, there should now be none,” said North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis, who sits on the Senate Banking Committee, which oversees Fed nominations. “It is now the independence and credibility of the Department of Justice that are in question.”

Associated Press writers Seung Min Kim, Eric Tucker, and Alanna Durkin Richer contributed to this report.
https://www.sgvtribune.com/2026/01/11/federal-reserve-powell-subpoena/

Funding Radar: Canada to launch C$100M global call on disruptive tech

Posted on by
Reply

From January 2026, the Canadian government will lead a C$100 million (€61. 4 million) international research initiative to harness disruptive technologies able to address global challenges. Proposals must address at least one of the 17 United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals, the call text says. To meet the interdisciplinary requirements, project proposals must integrate expertise from at least two of the following domains: natural sciences and engineering; social sciences and humanities; and health and life sciences. Consortia must also include at least three co-principal investigators, each eligible to receive funding from a different participating.
https://sciencebusiness.net/news/r-d-funding/international-news/funding-radar-canada-launch-c100m-global-call-disruptive-tech

Congress Moves Quickly to Bring Epstein Files Closer to Sunlight – Liberty Nation News

Posted on by
Reply

With a single exception, the House of Representatives on Tuesday, Nov. 18, voted unanimously to pass the Epstein Files Transparency Act and send it to the Senate. The act requires the Justice Department to make public all “unclassified records, documents, communications and investigative materials” related to the late convicted sex predator and accused sex trafficker within 30 days of the bill being signed into law. The Senate gave the American public whiplash when, just hours later, it too fired the bill off to the president’s desk by unanimous consent. Several GOP representatives expressed concern at some of the bill’s language, but it seems the public circus this whole affair has stirred up was too much for those who believe the legislation needed more work. The final vote in the House was 427-1. It is a historic and unprecedented move. These documents pertain to criminal investigations – something normally outside of its purview. That’s what troubles some Republicans. The lone “nay” vote belonged to Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA), who explained in a post on X: “What was wrong with the bill three months ago is still wrong today. It abandons 250 years of criminal justice procedure in America. As written, this bill reveals and injures thousands of innocent people – witnesses, people who provided alibis, family members, etc. If enacted in its current form, this type of broad reveal of criminal investigative files, released to a rabid media, will absolutely result in innocent people being hurt. [emphasis Higgins’]” A Dangerous Political Exercise House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and other GOPers expressed similar concerns about the lack of proper protections for some of Epstein’s victims and for many others whose names appear in the Epstein files and, thus, may be assumed to have been involved in the disgraced financier’s crimes even though they were not. There’s also the possible chilling effect the passage of this bill could have on future criminal investigations. Speaking to reporters on Nov. 18, Johnson said, “Who’s going to want to come forward if they think Congress can take a political exercise and reveal their identities? Who’s going to come talk to prosecutors? It’s very dangerous. It would deter future whistleblowers and informants.” The Speaker said he would insist to Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) that language is inserted into the bill that will ensure the privacy of individuals who, for various reasons, are named in the Epstein files but are not implicated in any wrongdoing. These may include witnesses, victims, family members, whistleblowers, and even law enforcement personnel who may have been working undercover during the Epstein investigation. As Higgins further pointed out in his X post: “The Oversight Committee is conducting a thorough investigation that has already released well over 60,000 pages of documents from the Epstein case. That effort will continue in a manner that provides all due protections for innocent Americans.” Higgins added that he would vote for the bill when it returned to the House “[i]f the Senate amends the bill to properly address privacy of victims and other Americans, who are named but not criminally implicated.” He will not get the chance, though. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) asked for unanimous consent and got it without objection. Previously, he had said in a statement, “Republicans have spent months trying to protect Donald Trump and hide what’s in the files. Americans are tired of waiting and are demanding to see the truth. If Leader Thune tries to bury the bill, I’ll stop him.” This has been the line from Democrats for months, even though the name Epstein barely crossed their lips for the four years during which the Biden administration sat on the Epstein files, making no move to release anything. For his part, Thune had reportedly indicated that, because the House so overwhelmingly approved the bill, the Senate is unlikely to alter it to any extent, and the upper chamber is likely to move swiftly. Unanimous consent means no debate, obviously, no changes to the bill, and therefore no need to return it to the House. The Epstein Files and Trump As so many have pointed out – including The Washington Post, a newspaper well-known for its heavy anti-Trump leanings – if the Epstein files implicated Trump in anything that appeared remotely illegal, immoral, or underhanded, that information would have been leaked to the media years ago. Undoubtedly, Trump’s political opponents would have ensured any such revelations were so widely known that almost certainly America’s 47th president would not have been named Trump. After blowing hot and cold on the issue, the president finally signaled his approval of the Epstein bill and asserted that he would sign it even without the kinds of additional protections many Republicans called for. He may believe that this will finally put the whole affair in the rearview mirror. He would be wrong about that. The Epstein files saga is not nearing its end. In fact, this is not even the beginning of the end – it may just be the end of the beginning. What follows, after the president signs the bill and the DOJ reluctantly complies, will be a months-long media feeding frenzy and probably a few lawsuits. Elected Democrats, after they have pored over every word in the documents and come up with nothing they can pin on Trump, will inevitably proclaim that the documents containing the damning evidence have been classified and redacted. Trump’s enemies could be about to fall into a trap of their own making – focusing so much on flogging this particular deceased Equus ferus caballus that even their most ardent anti-Trump cheerleaders get tired of it. But perhaps they believe this is their new secret midterm elections weapon. Spoiler alert: It almost certainly is not.
https://www.libertynation.com/congress-moves-quickly-to-bring-epstein-files-closer-to-sunlight/

Federal judges block Texas from using its new US House map in the 2026 midterms

Posted on by
Reply

A federal court on Tuesday blocked Texas from using a redrawn U.S. House map that touched off a nationwide redistricting battle and is a major piece of President Donald Trump’s efforts to preserve a slim Republican majority ahead of the 2026 elections. Texas this summer was the first state to meet Trump’s demands in what has become an expanding national battle over redistricting. Republicans drew the state’s new map to give the GOP five additional seats, and Missouri and North Carolina followed with new maps adding an additional Republican seat each. To counter those moves, California voters approved a ballot initiative to give Democrats an additional five seats there. “The public perception of this case is that it’s about politics. To be sure, politics played a role in drawing the 2025 Map. But it was much more than just politics. Substantial evidence shows that Texas racially gerrymandered the 2025 Map,” the ruling states. The 2-1 decision followed a nearly two-week trial in El Paso, Texas. Texas’ expected appeal would be directly to the U.S. Supreme Court, under a federal law dealing with redistricting lawsuits. A coalition of civil rights groups representing Black and Hispanic voters argued the map reduced the influence of minority voters, making it a racial gerrymander that violates the federal Voting Rights Act and the U.S. Constitution. They sought an order blocking Texas from using the map while their case proceeded, which would force the state to use the map drawn by the GOP-controlled Legislature in 2021 for next year’s elections. The panel of judges granted the critics’ request, signaling that they think those critics have a substantial chance of winning their case at trial. Judges appointed by Trump and Democratic President Barack Obama formed the majority. An appointee of Republican President Ronald Reagan dissented. “Without an injunction, the racial minorities the Plaintiff Groups represent will be forced to be represented in Congress based on likely unconstitutional racial classifications for at least two years,” the ruling said. Republicans in Texas said repeatedly during the Legislature’s debates this summer, and after, that they were redrawing districts solely to help Republicans win more seats. The U.S. Supreme Court gave states the go-ahead to pursue partisan gerrymandering by ruling in 2019 that it’s a political issue beyond the reach of the federal courts. But the two appeals judges concluded that a major reason that GOP Gov. Greg Abbott and Republican lawmakers moved was a letter from the head of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division in July, directing Texas to redraw four districts that it said violated the Voting Rights Act. Harmeet Dhillon, the assistant U.S. attorney general overseeing the division, cited a ruling last year by the conservative federal appeals court for Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declared that the landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965 does not allow separate minority groups to “aggregate their populations” to argue that a map illegally dilutes minority voters’ ability to elect the candidate of their choice. The court said each group’s situation must be analyzed separately. Dhillon argued that so-called “coalition” districts, where no group has a majority but minority voters together outnumber non-Hispanic white voters, must be dismantled as “vestiges of an unconstitutional racially based gerrymandering past.” “The Legislature adopted those racial objectives,” the majority said. “The redistricting bill’s sponsors made numerous statements suggesting that they had intentionally manipulated the districts’ lines to create more majority-Hispanic and majority-Black districts.” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment about the ruling. Republicans hold 25 of Texas’ 38 congressional seats, with Democrats holding two of their 13 seats in districts that Trump carried in 2024. Had the new map been in place last year, Trump would have carried 30 congressional districts by 10 percentage points or more, making it likely that the GOP would have won that many seats as well. Democrats across the U.S. have described the redistricting in Texas and other states as a power grab by Trump designed to prevent a congressional check on him, regardless of voter anger. Republicans are keen to avoid a repeat of the 2018 midterms, when they lost the majority and the Democratic-controlled House twice impeached Trump. The new map decreased from 16 to 14 the number of congressional districts where minorities comprise a majority of voting-age citizens. In doing so, they eliminated what had been five of nine coalition districts. Five of six Democratic lawmakers drawn into districts with other incumbents are Black or Hispanic. Yet Republicans argued that the map is better for minority voters. While five “coalition” districts are eliminated, there’s a new, eighth Hispanic-majority district, and two new Black-majority districts. Critics consider each of those new districts a sham, arguing that the majority is so slim that white voters, who tend to turn out in larger numbers, will control election results. Stay informed and connected — subscribe to The Philadelphia Tribune NOW! Click Here Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Don’t Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated. Be Truthful. Don’t knowingly lie about anyone or anything. Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person. Be Proactive. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts. Share with Us. We’d love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.
https://www.phillytrib.com/news/federal-judges-block-texas-from-using-its-new-us-house-map-in-the-2026-midterms/article_c4887c98-6b09-445a-989d-ced904e7d6fc.html

Senate inches closer to vote on government shutdown deal

Posted on by
Reply

WASHINGTON — The Senate edged closer to a vote on legislation to end the government shutdown on Monday after a small group of Senate Democrats broke a 40-day stalemate late Sunday evening. These Democrats voted with Republicans to move forward with reopening the government.

It remains unclear when the Senate will hold final votes on the bill, but Senate Majority Leader John Thune expressed hope that passage would take “hours not days.” “The American people have suffered for long enough. Let’s not pointlessly drag this bill out,” Thune said as the Senate convened Monday morning.

The legislation still needs to clear the House before the government can officially reopen. Speaker Mike Johnson urged lawmakers to start returning to Washington “right now,” given travel delays, but said he would issue an official notice for the House’s return once the Senate passes the legislation.

“We have to do this as quickly as possible,” Johnson said at a news conference. He has kept the House out of session since mid-September, when the chamber passed a bill to continue government funding.

After weeks of negotiations, moderate Senate Democrats agreed to reopen the government without a guaranteed extension of health care subsidies. This decision angered many in their caucus, who have demanded Republicans negotiate on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) tax credits that expire January 1.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) promised a mid-December vote on the subsidies but made no guarantees about its outcome. The final procedural vote to advance the bill was 60-40.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York voted against moving ahead with the package, along with most of his Democratic colleagues. “We will not give up the fight,” Schumer said, adding that Democrats have now “sounded the alarm” on health care.

Still, an end to the shutdown could be delayed by days if any senators object and prolong the process. Thune is also addressing concerns within the Republican conference about individual provisions in the spending bills. For instance, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul threatened to object to a provision championed by his state colleague, former GOP leader Sen. Mitch McConnell, that prevents the sale of certain hemp-based products. Paul is seeking an amendment to remove this language before the final vote.

President Donald Trump expressed support for the agreement Monday, stating, “We’re going to be opening up our country very quickly.”

### Five Democrats Switch Votes

A group of three former governors—New Hampshire Sens. Jeanne Shaheen and Maggie Hassan, along with Independent Sen. Angus King of Maine—broke the six-week stalemate Sunday by agreeing to vote to advance three bipartisan annual spending bills and extend remaining government funding until late January.

The legislation includes a reversal of the mass firings of federal workers conducted by the Trump administration since the shutdown began on October 1. It also protects federal workers against further layoffs through January and guarantees they will be paid once the shutdown ends.

In addition to Shaheen, King, and Hassan, Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia—home to tens of thousands of federal workers—also voted in favor of moving forward. Other Democrats who voted yes include Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman, and Nevada Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto and Jacky Rosen.

The moderates had expected a larger number of Democrats to join them, as 10–12 Democratic senators had been part of the negotiations. However, only five ultimately switched their votes—the exact number Republicans needed. Notably, King, Cortez Masto, and Fetterman had already been voting to open the government since October 1.

The agreement encompasses bipartisan bills crafted by the Senate Appropriations Committee to fund segments of the government, including food aid, veterans programs, and the legislative branch, among others.

### Democrats Call the Vote a “Mistake”

Schumer, who faced backlash from his party in March for voting to keep the government open, said he could not “in good faith” support the measure after a more than two-hour meeting with his caucus on Sunday.

Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who caucuses with the Democrats, decried giving up the fight as a “horrific mistake.” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) agreed, noting that voters who overwhelmingly supported Democrats in last week’s elections are urging them to “hold firm.”

House Democrats quickly criticized the Senate decision. Texas Rep. Greg Casar, chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, called a deal that doesn’t reduce health care costs a “betrayal” of millions of Americans relying on Democrats to fight for them.

Yet some gave Schumer a nod of support. House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who had criticized Schumer in March after his vote to keep the government open, praised him on Monday and expressed confidence in his leadership throughout the shutdown.

“The American people know we are on the right side of this fight,” Jeffries said Monday, pointing to Tuesday’s election results.

### Health Care Debate Ahead

It remains uncertain whether the two parties will find common ground on health care subsidies ahead of the promised December vote in the Senate. House Speaker Mike Johnson has said he will not commit to bringing the issue up in his chamber.

On Monday, Johnson reiterated that House Republicans have always been open to voting to reform what he called the “unaffordable care act,” but again did not specify if they would vote on extending the subsidies.

Some Republicans have expressed openness to extending the COVID-19-era tax credits as premiums could dramatically increase for millions of Americans. However, they also seek new eligibility limits for these subsidies and insist that tax funding for the plans should be routed through individuals.

Other Republicans, including Trump, have used the debate to renew longstanding criticism of the ACA, calling for it to be scrapped or overhauled.
https://www.phillytrib.com/senate-inches-closer-to-vote-on-government-shutdown-deal/article_ab1e0940-4797-4551-bdb7-a2c09cef64a0.html

Senate Fails to End Shutdown – But New Plans Rise From the Ashes – Liberty Nation News

Posted on by
Reply

The Senate convened on Friday, November 7, to once again discuss ending the government shutdown and paying federal workers. However, the first issue—ending the shutdown—did not even come to a vote. The second issue, paying federal employees, did come up for a vote but failed, just as it has each time before.

Now, however, Republicans have introduced a new plan aimed at enticing Democrats—or at least some of them—to help fund the government. Notably, this plan does not include extending the Obamacare subsidies. Instead, another proposal may take their place. The big question remains: can the Senate actually make progress this weekend? Ultimately, it comes down to how urgently Democrats want to break the shutdown cycle and achieve affordable, effective health care.

### A Brand-New Plan

After six hours of debate and yet another failed vote on the Shutdown Fairness Act, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) set the stage for the next day’s repeat cycle: reconsider the bill, have more comments, and adjourn after another failed vote. This routine has persisted for more than a month without success.

The bill to pay furloughed employees was rejected again, with a vote of 53-43. Meanwhile, the continuing resolution to fund the government—which had already failed 14 times—did not even earn a vote this time.

That’s when Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA) took to the floor and proposed a different path forward.

> “I’m gonna try to present a way forward for Democrats, Republicans, and Americans out of our current situation with a different proposal than people have already thought of,” Cassidy said.
> “Now the government shouldn’t have been shut down for 38 days, and tomorrow we’re going to vote again, and the vote will again fail. But Americans—Congress—is frustrated. We need to open the government, so, if to open the government we need to talk about health care, let’s talk about health care.”

### Rethinking Health Care Subsidies

Cassidy critiqued the Affordable Care Act (ACA), arguing that while it aimed to make health care affordable by funneling more money to insurance companies, this actually drives up costs for those not receiving subsidies.

Instead, he proposed a pre-funded flexible savings account that would provide individuals with as much funding as the enhanced premium tax credit they would receive under Obamacare. The idea is to send billions of tax dollars directly to Americans for health spending, rather than to insurance companies.

What difference does it make if the money goes to individuals instead of insurers? According to Cassidy, it’s about cutting out the middleman and creating incentives to reduce health care prices. Currently, insurance companies get paid regardless of how expensive a patient’s bill is, removing any motivation to lower costs.

If the money goes directly to patients, however, those patients theoretically gain more control over their health care spending and costs.

Moreover, Cassidy’s proposal envisions these accounts as more flexible than traditional insurance plans, covering a broader range of services including eye exams, glasses, dental work, and more.

In essence, it’s the same amount of money—just redirected to the individual rather than to insurance companies.

### New Steps to End the Shutdown

It’s important to note that Cassidy’s health care proposal is separate from the continuing resolution intended to end the shutdown. This new bill would be considered after the shutdown is resolved and is likely intended to replace the ACA COVID-era subsidies extension bill that Democrats have demanded.

For the immediate goal of reopening the government, Senate Republicans have proposed a new resolution to fund the government through sometime in January. This resolution would also fund the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and Congress through September 30, 2026.

However, it remains unclear whether the resolution can garner enough Democratic support to clear the 60-vote threshold needed to end a filibuster.

On one hand, the consequences of the shutdown—such as disruptions to welfare funding, air traffic control, and increased flight delays—are troubling enough to pressure some Democrats to vote in favor. On the other hand, any move to reopen the government without guaranteed extensions of ACA subsidies could be seen by progressives and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) as a betrayal.

### What’s Next?

A vote to invoke cloture (ending debate) on this new plan could happen Saturday afternoon if Senate leadership believes there are enough votes. If cloture passes, a final vote—which requires only a simple majority—could take place as soon as Sunday or Monday.

After Senate approval, the resolution would then move to the House of Representatives. So far, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) has not indicated whether the GOP-controlled House will follow the Senate’s lead.

### A Glimmer of Hope

While Friday’s Senate session accomplished as little as all those during the shutdown, some lawmakers now see a potential light at the end of the tunnel. With new proposals on the table and a mounting desire—on both sides—to end the impasse, there is cautious optimism that progress could finally be made soon.
https://www.libertynation.com/senate-fails-to-end-shutdown-but-new-plans-rise-from-the-ashes/

Santa Clarita Congressman George Whitesides Responds To Nancy Pelosi’s Retirement Plans

Posted on by
Reply

**Nancy Pelosi Announces Retirement: Will Not Seek Re-election in 2026**

Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the first female Speaker of the House, announced on Thursday that she will not be seeking re-election in 2026. At 85 years old, Pelosi plans to serve out the remainder of her current term, which ends on January 3, 2027, after which she intends to retire.

“With a grateful heart, I look forward to my final year of service as your proud representative,” Pelosi said in a nearly six-minute video posted on X early Thursday morning, addressing her constituents.

Pelosi was first elected to Congress to represent San Francisco in 1987 at age 47. She made history as the first woman to serve as Speaker of the House, a position that placed her third in line after the President and Vice President. She led her party in the lower chamber of Congress from 2003 until 2023.

“Speaker Pelosi made history as the first female Speaker of the House and brought billions in federal funding home to California,” said Congressman George Whitesides, D-Agua Dulce. “She was instrumental in lowering health care costs for millions of Californians through the Affordable Care Act. I look forward to serving alongside her for the remainder of this term.”

Throughout her decades-long career, Pelosi became well-known for her advocacy on several key issues. She championed efforts to find a cure for HIV/AIDS, fought against climate change, and funded programs supporting early child development, including universal pre-kindergarten initiatives.

“Nancy Pelosi was not content to be just a master legislator in Congress,” said U.S. Senator Adam Schiff. “She was a global leader. Her voice carried far beyond the walls of Congress as she championed human rights, democracy, women’s equality, and a healthier planet in her travels around the world. She represented the United States on the world stage—trailblazing while balancing the demands of an unruly Congress. Like Ginger Rogers, she did it backwards and in heels.”

When asked about Pelosi’s upcoming retirement, former President Donald Trump commented Thursday that the senator was “an evil woman.” He added, “I’m glad she’s retiring. I think she did the country a great service by retiring. I think she was a tremendous liability for the country.”

The race for Pelosi’s seat is expected to be highly competitive. State Senator Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, and Saikat Chakrabarti, former chief of staff to Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, have already announced their candidacies.

The filing period for California’s congressional primary begins on February 9, 2026, and closes on March 6.

—

**Sponsored Articles**
Do you have a news tip? Call us at (661) 298-1220, or send an email to news@hometownstation.com.

Don’t miss a thing—get breaking KHTS Santa Clarita News Alerts delivered directly to your inbox.

**Report a typo or error:** Email Corrections@hometownstation.com.
https://www.hometownstation.com/santa-clarita-news/politics/santa-clarita-congressman-george-whitesides-responds-to-nancy-pelosis-retirement-plans-570513

Election Results – Numbers and Narrative – Liberty Nation News

Posted on by
Reply

Democrats Celebrate Strong Election Results in Virginia, New Jersey, and New York City

The results are in from yesterday’s elections, and while the final ballots are still being tallied, it was a great day for Democrats in Virginia, New Jersey, and New York City. In what was essentially a clean sweep, Democratic Party contenders overperformed in just about every race.

What comes next is the narrative building around how these victories can be used as indicators for the 2026 midterms. Although the burgeoning story suggests that November 4 was a repudiation of the Donald Trump presidency, it’s worth remembering that all these contests took place in reliably blue locations. But what does the data tell us?

Virginia Election Turnaround

Democratic Party candidate Abigail Spanberger secured a decisive victory with 57% of the vote, compared to 42% for GOP Lieutenant Governor Winsome Earle-Sears. While this race was never expected to be close—especially with large numbers of Virginians furloughed due to the shutdown—Spanberger exceeded her polling numbers significantly.

Liberty Nation News’ Public Square polling aggregator had her leading by 8.4%, yet her election day winning margin of 15% surpassed expectations. In fact, only one poll came close, a mid-October YouGov survey that predicted a similar result.

Two factors likely harmed Earle-Sears’ chances beyond demographic challenges in the DC-adjacent region. First, her contentious relationship with President Trump—who notably did not endorse her—damaged her standing. After the 2022 midterms, Earle-Sears blamed Trump almost entirely for the GOP’s losses, despite him not being in office at the time.

Second, running on the same ballot, Attorney General Jason Miyares politically undercut her on polling day by urging voters to split their tickets to ensure his own election. While this last-minute endorsement shift may not have drastically affected in-person voting, it likely didn’t help her cause.

Virginia Attorney General Race

This contest was the only one where surprises were expected. Democrat Jay Jones trailed for weeks before a scandal involving released text messages—where he wished death upon the small children of a political rival—caused polling to shift.

By election day, an average of polls suggested just a 0.3% advantage for Jones. Despite the controversy, Virginians appeared unbothered by the scandal, as Jones comfortably won 53% to 46%.

Notably, neither Abigail Spanberger nor other elected Democrats distanced themselves from Jones, continuing their support despite his scandal. This underscores that, for some, tribal voting and party loyalty take precedence over principle and morality.

New Jersey Election: GOP Falls Short Again

Democrat Mikie Sherrill trounced Republican candidate Jack Ciattarelli by 13 points, winning 56% of the vote to Ciattarelli’s 43%. Despite recent political headwinds suggesting a potential close race, the margin of victory was wider than expected.

No poll predicted such a decisive win; polling averages pointed to just a 5.2% difference. This was Ciattarelli’s second attempt, following a narrow loss to New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy in 2021 by three points, and likely his last.

As Liberty Nation News’ Senior Political Analyst Tim Donner noted, “He has run an effective campaign in a state that, while heavily blue, has elected GOP governors four times in the last 30 years, with Chris Christie and Christine Todd Whitman each serving two terms.”

New York City Mayoral Race: Record Turnout Amidst Divided Votes

With more than two million votes cast, the New York City mayoral election saw the highest turnout since John Lindsay’s blowout victory in 1969. Democrat Zohran Mamdani won just over 50% of the vote, defeating independent former Governor Andrew Cuomo, who secured 41%, and Republican Curtis Sliwa, who captured 7%.

To put it in perspective, Cuomo’s vote total of over 850,000 would have been enough to win any similar contest since Rudy Giuliani in 1993. This suggests that despite Mamdani’s substantial polling lead, a significant minority of voters were determined to block the socialist candidate from entering Gracie Mansion.

An aggregate of surveys gave Mamdani a 16.2% advantage; however, he was the only major candidate in yesterday’s elections who underperformed relative to polls.

The Trump Narrative

Victory laps abound as the dust settles, with many touting these election results as a damning indictment of Donald Trump. While the outcomes are unfavorable for the former president, they are not surprising.

New Jersey is a solidly blue state that has not voted for a Republican president since George H.W. Bush. Trump lost here in 2024 by almost six points. Virginia mirrors this pattern, with Trump again falling short by roughly six points, and its last GOP presidential choice being Bush the younger. New York City was an almost 70% vote blowout for Vice President Kamala Harris.

Ultimately, Trump remains the party’s figurehead, and the election reflects on his leadership as captain of the ship. Democratic supporters are celebrating not only these wins but also the margins by which their candidates exceeded polling expectations.

—

These election results underscore the challenges the Republican Party faces in reliably blue regions and offer early insights into voter sentiment ahead of the 2026 midterms. As the political landscape continues to evolve, the significance of party loyalty and the impact of candidate controversies remain key factors shaping electoral outcomes.
https://www.libertynation.com/election-results-numbers-and-narrative/

Trump Vows to Withhold ‘SNAP BENEFITS’ Until Government Is Reopened

Posted on by
Reply

This thread has been removed.

**Date:** November 4, 2025
**Time:** 10:20:04 AM PST
**Removed by:** Admin Moderator
**Reason:** Copyright infringement
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4350638/posts