E. Jean Carroll says she plans to use at least part of the $83.3 million in damages she was awarded by a New York City jury last week to buy premium dog food for her Great Pyrenees and pitbull. In an interview this past weekend, Carroll said she won’t waste a cent of the awarded damages, claiming: “We’re going to do something good with it.” When pressed further, she mused: “I’m going to be able to buy some premium dog food now.”
The damages awarded on Friday vastly overtake the previous $5 million she was granted by a jury in a separate trial against former President Trump last spring. Attorneys for Trump announced their intention to appeal the defamation judgment.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
Former President Trump is expected to file post-trial motions, including a Motion for Remittitur, with Judge Lewis Kaplan asking that the $83.3 million judgment be reduced as it far exceeds what Carroll had claimed in damages. Post-trial, a judge can intervene and reduce damages if they determine the judgment far exceeds what is reasonable.
“Judge Lewis Kaplan has the authority to enter a conditional order of remittitur, compelling E. Jean Carroll to choose between a reduction of the verdict and a new trial if his court determines that the award is intrinsically excessive,” said Colleen Kerwick, a litigation attorney, in a recent interview.
Kerwick continued: “If that Motion for Remittitur is denied, it would still provide his attorneys with an opportunity to expand the Record on Appeal as nothing new can be introduced at the Appellate level — the Appellate Court’s task is to look over Judge Kaplan’s work and determine if he abused his discretion or erred as a matter of law in his rulings.”
She also added it is likely Trump’s attorneys will challenge the constitutionality of New York’s Adult Survivors Act, which altered the statute of limitations that allowed Carroll to file a civil case on her sexual assault allegation. Trump has already challenged the law at the district court level, with any appeals likely to make their way to the Supreme Court eventually.
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
More From The Pulse
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Congresswoman LaMonica McIver (D-NJ) is facing charges for impeding Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agents during an altercation at an immigration facility in May.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Rep. LaMonica McIver, Newark Mayor Ras Baraka, and federal agents.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The incident occurred on May 9 at the Delaney Hall immigration facility in New Jersey. McIver is expected to plead “not guilty” to charges in court on Wednesday, June 25, 2025.
💬KEY QUOTE: “The facts of this case will prove I was simply doing my job and will expose these proceedings for what they are: a brazen attempt at political intimidation.” – Rep. LaMonica McIver.
🎯IMPACT: McIver faces up to 17 years in prison if convicted on all charges.
IN FULL
Representative LaMonica McIver (D-NJ) is set to appear in court to face charges stemming from a May 9 incident at the Delaney Hall immigration facility. McIver is accused of forcibly impeding federal officers during the attempted arrest of Newark Mayor Ras Baraka. The charges include allegations that McIver physically obstructed officers, using her arms to block and strike them.
According to the Department of Justice (DOJ), Baraka had entered a secured area of the facility and refused to leave when asked by federal agents. As officers attempted to arrest him, McIver allegedly intervened, using physical force against the agents. Each of the first two counts against McIver carries a maximum sentence of eight years, while a third count carries up to one year.
Acting U.S. Attorney Alina Habba, who has previously represented President Donald J. Trump, is overseeing the prosecution. Habba stated that McIver “assaulted, impeded, and interfered with law enforcement.” In response, McIver has denied the charges, asserting that the case is a politically motivated attempt to intimidate her.
“The facts of this case will prove I was simply doing my job and will expose these proceedings for what they are: a brazen attempt at political intimidation,” McIver said in a statement. She added, “This indictment is no more justified than the original charge and is an effort by Trump’s administration to dodge accountability for the chaos ICE caused and scare me out of doing the work I was elected to do.”
Meanwhile, the Campaign for Accountability, a liberal watchdog group, has filed an ethics complaint against Habba, accusing her of targeting McIver and Baraka for their involvement in the protest and oversight visit. The group alleges the charges are politically motivated. Baraka, who was arrested during the incident, had a trespassing charge against him dismissed.
🚨WATCH: US Congresswoman, LaMonica McIver (wearing a red blazer), storms the gate of Delaney Hall Detention Center ASSAULTING an ICE agent. pic.twitter.com/4Q1deds1tl
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Zohran Mamdani, a Uganda-born Democratic Socialist, defeated former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo in the New York City Democratic mayoral primary.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Zohran Mamdani, Andrew Cuomo, New York Attorney General Letitia James, and other Democratic leaders.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The primary election took place in New York City on Tuesday, June 24, 2025.
💬KEY QUOTE: “Tonight, we made history. In the words of Nelson Mandela, it always seems impossible until it is done… I will be your Democratic nominee for the Mayor of New York City,” Mamdani said, before declaring that NYC will be a city “…where the mayor will use their power to reject Donald Trump’s fascism—to stop mass ICE agents from deporting our neighbors… .”
🎯IMPACT: Mamdani’s victory is seen as a tectonic shift in the Democratic Party, with younger and progressivevoters gaining influence. The mayoral candidate was backed by a far-left political coalition led by Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), herself rising quickly as the potential front-runner for the Democratic Party’s 2028 presidential nomination.
IN FULL
Democratic Socialist Zohran Mamdani defeated former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo in a stunning upset during the New York City Democratic mayoral primary. Mamdani, a two-term Queens assemblyman originally from Uganda, secured 43 percent of the vote compared to Cuomo’s 36 percent, with 96 percent of precincts reporting. Cuomo conceded Tuesday evening, acknowledging Mamdani’s victory.
Notably, Mamdani was backed by a far-left political coalition led by progressive Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who is widely seen as a potential front-runner for the 2028 Democratic Party presidential nomination. Along with Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Ocasio-Cortez helped to rally young Democrats to Mamadni—with the latter’s radical politics serving as a selling point over the more establishment views of former Governor Cuomo.
Basil Smikle, a former executive director of the New York State Democratic Party, remarked, “It’s an important moment in political history. Mamdani ran as an economic populist. It was a campaign about affordability.” His proposals, including free bus fares and higher taxes on the wealthy, resonated with blue-collar voters, despite criticism of their feasibility. Cuomo’s campaign, despite backing by $25 million from a super PAC and support from several unions, struggled to match Mamdani’s grassroots momentum.
“Tonight, we made history. In the words of Nelson Mandela, it always seems impossible until it is done… I will be your Democratic nominee for the mayor of New York City,” Mamdani declared late Tuesday night. He continued: “We have won from Harlem to Bay Ridge… from Jackson Heights to Port Richmond… New Yorkers have stood up for a city they can afford—where those who toil in the night can enjoy the fruits of their labor in the day.”
“And it’s where the mayor will use their power to reject Donald Trump’s fascism—to stop mass ICE agents from deporting our neighbors, and to govern our city as a model for the Democratic Party, where we fight for working people with no apology,” Mamdani added.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Iranian lawmakers voted to suspend cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)—the United Nations (UN) nuclear watchdog—over its refusal to condemn recent Israeli and U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Iranian lawmakers, Iran’s Guardian Council, the IAEA, Israel, and the United States.
📍WHEN & WHERE: June 25, 2025, Tehran, Iran
💬KEY QUOTE: “The International Atomic Energy Agency, which refused to even marginally condemn the attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, put its international credibility up for auction.” – Iranian Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf.
🎯IMPACT: The move threatens international monitoring of Iran’s nuclear program and reescalates tensions after a 12-day conflict involving Israeli and U.S. strikes.
IN FULL
Iran’s parliament voted overwhelmingly on Wednesday to suspend cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), amid backlash over the United Nations (UN) nuclear watchdog’s refusal to condemn Israeli and U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear infrastructure. The decision followed a 12-day conflict between Israel and Iran, with the U.S. joining for a one-strike operation against hardened Iranian atomic sites.
Parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf accused the IAEA of selling out its credibility by not condemning the attacks. “The International Atomic Energy Agency, which refused to even marginally condemn the attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, put its international credibility up for auction,” he declared during the session, as broadcast by state TV.
The legislation calls for Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization to suspend cooperation with the UN body until the security of Iran’s nuclear sites is guaranteed. The measure passed with 221 votes in favor, one abstention, and zero opposition. Final implementation still awaits approval by the Guardian Council, the Islamist clerical body that vets all Iranian legislation.
During the session, lawmakers erupted into chants of “Death to America” and “Death to Israel.” The outburst followed strikes by Israel on June 13 targeting Iran, followed by American strikes on the Fordo, Isfahan, and Natanz nuclear sites ahead of a Tuesday ceasefire agreement brokered by U.S. President Donald J. Trump.
Since the beginning of the hostilities, Iranian officials have condemned the IAEA’s inaction, arguing it failed to uphold its mandate of ensuring the safety and integrity of nuclear facilities. Israel’s strikes were precipitated in part by an IAEA report warning Iran was violating its obligations on uranium enrichment by building up a stockpile more suited for nuclear weapons than civil nuclear energy.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Media Matters for America has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), accusing it of conducting a retaliatory investigation allegedly influenced by President Donald J. Trump and Elon Musk.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Media Matters for America, the FTC, Elon Musk, and the Trump administration.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The lawsuit was filed on Monday in Washington, D.C.
💬KEY QUOTE: “This is a significant free-speech issue, and Media Matters will not back down from this fight.” – Angelo Carusone
🎯IMPACT: Media Matters claims the investigation has disrupted its operations, including layoffs and strained partnerships with advocacy groups.
IN FULL
George Soros-funded activist group Media Matters for America has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), alleging that the agency is conducting a retaliatory investigation influenced by President Donald J. Trump and Elon Musk. The supposed “media watchdog” claims that the FTC is using its authority to “silence and harass” the organization.
In a statement, Angelo Carusone, chairman and president of Media Matters, described the case as a “significant free-speech issue” and vowed not to back down. “If the Trump administration is allowed to use this unlawful investigation to punish legitimate reporting on behalf of a political ally, then there is nothing to stop it from targeting anyone who stands up and exercises their rights,” Carusone claimed.
The FTC has issued Civil Investigative Demand letters, akin to subpoenas, requiring Media Matters and other organizations to provide detailed information about their operations, finances, and communications. Media Matters has asked a federal judge in Washington, D.C., to halt the investigation, claiming it violates the organization’s First Amendment rights.
The group has also alleged that the investigation, along with pressure from the Trump administration, Republican state attorneys, and Elon Musk, has disrupted its fundraising efforts, resulting in layoffs and strained relationships with other advocacy groups. Media Matters contends that some organizations now fear associating with it due to potential retribution.
The FTC declined to comment on the lawsuit, and Musk’s platform X, formerly known as Twitter, did not respond to inquiries. This legal action follows a November 2023 lawsuit by X against Media Matters, in which Musk accused the group of manipulating data to harm the platform’s reputation and chase away major advertisers in a targeted campaign.
Media Matters was founded by David Brock, a longtime ally of Hillary Clinton. Brock also founded the SuperPAC American Bridge 21st Century, which raised $150 million in 2024.
The FTC investigation into Media Matters comes as another Democratic group, the major fundraising platform ActBlue, is also facing legal scrutiny. The organization is alleged to have had lax donation requirements in the past, which could have allowed fraudulent contributions, such as foreign donations, using prepaid credit cards.
In April, President Trump announced that he would crack down on foreign donations in American elections. Attorney General Pam Bondi is examining whether ActBlue had facilitated “dummy” accounts to allow foreign nationals to donate to them and other Democratic entities.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Tucker Carlson alleged that the Murdoch family asked him to run against Donald J. Trump for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination—after firing him from Fox News.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, Rupert Murdoch, Lachlan Murdoch, and President Trump.
📍WHEN & WHERE: Carlson says this occurred in May 2023, following his termination in April 2023, as discussed on his show with guest Clayton Morris in June 2025.
💬KEY QUOTE: “The Murdochs really hate Trump. Like, there’s no one who hates Trump more than the Murdochs,” said Carlson.
🎯IMPACT: The revelation adds to ongoing speculation about the Murdoch family’s attitude towards the Trump administration, with the President having heavily criticized Fox News in recent weeks.
IN FULL
Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson has claimed that the Murdoch family—owners of Fox News, the Wall Street Journal, and The New York Post—urged him to run against Donald J. Trump in the 2024 Republican presidential primary. Carlson made the claim during a conversation with guest Clayton Morris on his show.
“The Murdochs really hate Trump. Like, there’s no one who hates Trump more than the Murdochs,” Carlson told Morris. He went on to allege that in May 2023, just a month after his firing, Lachlan Murdoch directly proposed the idea of him running against Trump for the Republican nomination, with the promise of full backing from their media empire.
“I got fired in April of 2023. In May of 2023, they asked me to run for President against Trump and said they would back me. Obviously, I’m not gonna be running for any office,” Carlson said, adding, “I like Trump!”
Morris pressed for clarification, asking if the suggestion came directly from Lachlan Murdoch. Carlson confirmed, stating, “Yeah, Lachlan Murdoch said, ‘You should run… We’ll back you, the whole thing.’” He continued, “I was still under contract, but they canceled my show. ‘You should run, we support you, you should run.’”
Carlson also suggested that the Murdochs’ motivation was to counter Trump’s presidential campaign, with Morris summarizing, “We want to stop Trump.” Carlson replied, “Yeah, well, he was running.”
❓WHAT HAPPENED: A new poll reveals strong opposition among American voters to taxpayer funding for organizations involved in abortions and child sex changes.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The Life Leadership Conference, registered voters, and organizations like Planned Parenthood.
💬KEY QUOTE: “The overwhelming majority of Americans strongly oppose their tax dollars bankrolling organizations that target minors for irreversible, sterilizing sex-change treatments and abortions—especially without parental involvement or consent.” – David Bereit.
🎯IMPACT: The poll highlights bipartisan opposition to taxpayer funding of abortion and so-called “gender-affirming care” for children.
IN FULL
A new poll conducted by the Life Leadership Conference reveals that 64 percent of registered voters oppose taxpayer funding for organizations that provide puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and other gender transition treatments for minors. Among these, 51 percent strongly opposed such funding.
The poll found significant opposition across political lines, with 76 percent of Republicans and 71 percent of independents against such funding. Democrats were evenly split at 44 percent in favor and 44 percent opposed. Executive Director of the Life Leadership Conference, David Bereit, commented, “The overwhelming majority of Americans strongly oppose their tax dollars bankrolling organizations that target minors for irreversible, sterilizing sex-change treatments and abortions — especially without parental involvement or consent.”
Further questions in the poll addressed taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood, particularly in light of recent investigations by Live Action, which found the organization providing hormone treatments to minors as young as 16 with limited parental consent or medical oversight. Sixty percent of voters opposed taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood, while 32 percent supported it.
When asked about funding organizations that provide abortions to minors without parental notification or consent, 67 percent of respondents opposed such funding, with 27 percent in favor. Opposition was strong among Republicans (79 percent) and independents (69 percent), but 53 percent of Democrats also expressed disapproval.
Bereit added, “Taxpayer funding should uplift American families, not Planned Parenthood—an organization actively undermining parents and harming children.”
President Donald J. Trump already halted all federal funding for transgender treatments for children earlier his year via executive order, though some healthcare facilities have chosen to ignore the directive.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Hunter Biden is being sued by Winston & Strawn LLP for unpaid legal fees exceeding $50,000.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Hunter Biden and the law firm Winston & Strawn LLP, which represented him in federal investigations.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The lawsuit was filed on Monday in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia.
💬KEY QUOTE: “While some of Mr. Biden’s bills were paid between March 2023 and October 2024, a substantial amount remains due and owing.” – Winston & Strawn LLP.
🎯IMPACT: The firm claims it has incurred substantial financial damages and seeks a lien on Hunter Biden’s assets.
IN FULL
Hunter Biden owes Winston & Strawn LLP, the law firm that represented him in federal investigations, over $50,000 in unpaid legal fees, according to a lawsuit filed on Monday. The firm represented Biden in several complex legal cases, including his Delaware gun case and other federal investigations.
The lawsuit, filed in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, states, “This is breach of contract action against Mr. Biden for unpaid legal fees.” The firm alleges that Hunter Biden has failed to pay despite “repeated requests for payment,” and that the unpaid amount includes interest. “While some of Mr. Biden’s bills were paid between March 2023 and October 2024, a substantial amount remains due and owing,” the firm said.
The complaint includes a copy of the engagement contract Hunter Biden signed in December 2022, which outlined the scope of legal representation, including assistance with congressional oversight and investigations by the Department of Justice (DOJ). The firm claims it devoted substantial resources to defending Biden and incurred significant financial damages as a result of his failure to fulfill the terms of the contract.
Hunter Biden’s attorney at the time, Abbe Lowell, who has since left Winston & Strawn, noted that his hourly rate was $1,510, with other attorneys charging between $230 and $1,945 an hour. The firm claims Hunter Biden never objected to any invoices but has not paid the outstanding balance, which remains “substantially in excess of $50,000.”
An initial hearing for the case is scheduled for September 19. Winston & Strawn declined to comment on the lawsuit. The case comes after Hunter Biden admitted he was too poor to continue suing a former Trump White House aide over his laptop, after accusing Garrett Ziegler of unlawfully accessing and disseminating the data on the “Laptop from Hell.“
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Top Trump officials have denied a CNN report claiming U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites failed to destroy core components. Notably, the report was penned by Natasha Bertrand, who was also a key figure in the promotion of the bogus Steele Dossier and the infamous letter from 51 intelligence officials alleging the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Natasha Bertrand, and unnamed CNN sources.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: U.S. military strikes occurred last weekend on three Iranian nuclear facilities; CNN report published June 24, 2025.
💬KEY QUOTE: “The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump, and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran’s nuclear program.” – Karoline Leavitt
🎯IMPACT: The conflicting reports on the strikes raise questions about the motivations behind leaked assessments, possibly by deep state factions in favor of more extensive U.S. involvement in a war with Iran.
IN FULL
Top Trump administration officials have denied a CNN report alleging that U.S. military strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites failed to destroy core components of the country’s nuclear program. The CNN report is supposedly based on an early U.S. intelligence assessment. Notably, its lead author is Natasha Bertrand—a journalist notorious for laundering information for partisan actors within the intelligence and security community, such as an infamous, discredited letter from 51 intelligence officials wrongly suggesting that the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation ahead of the 2020 election.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt dismissed the CNN report, calling it “flat-out wrong” and attributing the leak to a “low-level loser” in the intelligence community. “The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump, and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran’s nuclear program,” Leavitt said.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth also refuted the claims, stating, “Based on everything we have seen, and I’ve seen it all, our bombing campaign obliterated Iran’s ability to create nuclear weapons. Our massive bombs hit exactly the right spot at each target and worked perfectly.” He added that the impact of the strikes is “buried under a mountain of rubble in Iran.”
CNN’s report claimed the strikes “did not destroy the core components of the country’s nuclear program” and suggested they may have only set Iran’s nuclear ambitions back by months. The report cited a supposed early assessment from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), which is still ongoing and subject to change as more intelligence becomes available.
In addition to the aforementioned intelligence community efforts to undermine the Hunter Biden laptop story, Bertrand has also pushed the bogus Steele Dossier that spurred the Russiagate investigation into Trump.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell faced bipartisan pressure from House Democrats and House Republicans to begin cutting interest rates during a Tuesday hearing on Capitol Hill.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Democrat and Republican members of the House Financial Services Committee, Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, President Donald J. Trump, and Federal Reserve Board of Governors members Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: Powell testified before the House Financial Services Committee on Tuesday, June 24, 2025.
💬KEY QUOTE: “From our side, we’d love to see the rates go down,” said Congressman Juan Vargas (D-CA), adding: “I know a number of my colleagues on the other side would love to see the rates go down. I think it’s pretty unanimous.”
🎯IMPACT: With President Trump, GOP and Democrat lawmakers, and Federal Reserve governors increasingly opposed to Powell’s refusal to cut rates, he may be forced to begin climbing down from his position.
IN FULL
Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell is facing mounting pressure both internally at the central bank and externally from the White House and a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers on Capitol Hill to begin reducing U.S. interest rates. Appearing before Congress on Tuesday, Powell was peppered by House Republicans and Democrats alike to explain his reasoning for not moving to reduce the cost of borrowing.
“From our side, we’d love to see the rates go down,” Congressman Juan Vargas (D-CA) told the Fed chairman during a House Financial Services Committee hearing on Tuesday. The California Democrat added: “I know a number of my colleagues on the other side would love to see the rates go down. I think it’s pretty unanimous.”
Just before the hearing, President Donald J. Trump urged lawmakers to grill Powell, posting on Truth Social: “I hope Congress really works this very dumb, hardheaded person, over.”
The bipartisan pressure faced by Powell was compounded in recent days, which saw two members of the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors, who sit on the rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), announce their support for the central bank to begin cutting rates in July. On Friday, Federal Reserve Governor Christopher Waller acknowledged that fears over President Trump’s tariffs reigniting inflation were overblown. “I think we’re in the position that we could do this as early as July,” Waller stated, adding: “That would be my view, whether the committee would go along with it or not.”
Waller was joined on Monday by his fellow Fed governor and FOMC member, Michelle Bowman, who echoed her colleague. “It is likely that the impact of tariffs on inflation may take longer, be more delayed, and have a smaller effect than initially expected,” Bowman said in a speech at a research conference in Prague. She added: “Should inflation pressures remain contained, I would support lowering the policy rate as soon as our next meeting.”
Despite increasing internal and external pressure on Powell to slash rates, the Federal Reserve chairman remains obstinate. “As long as the economy’s strong, we can take a little bit of a pause,” Powell told House lawmakers in response to their push for a July rate cut. While the central bank chief acknowledged that the hard data suggests he should have continued reducing rates after the Fed’s last cut in December, Powell—repeating a mantra he has stated for months—insisted: “The difference, of course, is at this time, all forecasters are expecting pretty soon, that some significant inflation will show up from tariffs.”
However, there has been no evidence of a resurgence of inflation due to the tariffs imposed by the Trump White House. In fact, as Trump’s Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has noted, the tariffs may actually be having a deflationary effect, which should—under normal circumstances—spur the Federal Reserve to reduce interest rates.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Kilmar Abrego Garcia, charged with human smuggling in Tennessee, was ordered released after a judge questioned the strength of the government’s allegations against him.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Kilmar Abrego Garcia, federal prosecutors, U.S. Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes, and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agents.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The charges stem from incidents between 2016 and 2025, with recent hearings held in Nashville, Tennessee.
🎯IMPACT: Abrego Garcia faces potential deportation, with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) expected to detain him as an illegal alien if he is released from jail.
IN FULL
Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an illegal immigrant and alleged MS-13 gang member, has been ordered released pending trial after a federal judge called into question the strength of the Trump administration’s human smuggling charges against him. On Sunday, the U.S. Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes denied a request from federal prosecutors to keep Abrego Garcia in jail until trial, with the conditions of his release set to be established at a court hearing on Wednesday. However, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has a detainer against him as an illegal alien, so it is likely he will be taken back into custody by them immediately.
After initially being deported to his home country of El Salvador, Abrego Garcia was returned to the United States after protracted lawfare efforts spearheaded by Democrats who contend his deportation violated a 2019 immigration judge ruling, which ordered him removed from the United States but stipulated that he could not be returned to El Salvador, specifically. At the time, attorneys for the illegal alien had convinced the immigration court that he potentially faced violent retribution from a rival Salvadoran gang if he were to return home. Subsequently, Abrego Garcia was never removed by the former Biden government and instead allowed to remain in the United States. In 2021, he was he subject of a protective order filed by his wife, Jennifer Vasquez Sura, who alleged that he had beaten her.
The federal judge’s determination not to hold Abrego Garcia due to the supposed weakness of the government’s case—as well as an assertion that the Salvadoran nation may not be a member of MS-13—does not appear to conform with previous evidence. In the 2019 court order, the immigration judge found a preponderance of evidence indicated that Abrego Garcia was a member of the violent Salvadoran criminal gang. Additionally, footage of a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee strongly suggests that the Salvadoran illegal immigrant was materially involved in human smuggling, driving a modified vehicle which belonged to a human trafficker and was filled with migrants.
Body camera footage from the stop showed officers discussing suspicions of smuggling, with one officer stating, “He’s hauling these people for money.” A Homeland Security special agent testified that witnesses claimed Abrego Garcia earned over $100,000 annually from smuggling activities.
Federal prosecutors, who say witnesses have linked Abrego Garcia to the abuse of women and girls as well as firearms and narcotics trafficking, say they plan to appeal Judge Holmes’s decision to release the Salvadoran before his trial. Additionally, they informed the judge that if Abrego Garcia is released, he will immediately be detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), with deportation proceedings promptly reinitiated against him.
The alleged MS-13 gang member could be deported to a country other than El Salvador, though such a move would likely only happen after a court battle.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
Share Story
FacebookTwitterWhatsappTruthTelegramGettrCopy Link
Real News Fan? Show It!
Many people are shocked to learn that because of active censorship, we currently have to spend more time making sure you can even see The National Pulse, than on producing the news itself. Which sucks. Because we do this for the truth, and for you.
But the regime doesn’t want you being informed. That’s why they want us to go away. And that will happen if more people don’t sign up to support our work. It’s basic supply and demand. So demand you get to read The National Pulse, unrestricted. Sign up, today.
We don’t sell ads, and refuse corporate or political cash. It all comes down to you, the reader. I hope you can help.
.jpg){kind=link}
