Friday, April 18, 2025

WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.

Trump Trial Day 13: Michael Cohen Brings Bragg’s Case To A Disastrous End.

The thirteenth day of former President Donald J. Trump‘s Manhattan-based hush money trial continued with the prosecution’s direct examination of their star witness, serial perjurer Michael Cohen. Much like Monday’s testimony, Cohen and prosecutor Susan Hoffinger spent much of the morning and early afternoon discussing invoices and verbal payment agreements that may or may not have only existed in Cohen‘s head. Todd Blanche handled Cohen’s cross-examination, with the two clashing from the start.

Also of note, court transcripts of a sidebar conversation between Trump‘s defense team, Judge Juan Merchan, and prosecutor Joshua Steinglass revealed that Michael Cohen is the last witness for the prosecution. Previously, District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office had indicated they’d be bringing one additional witness after Cohen. With the prosecution’s case coming to a close, they have yet to detail what, if any, underlying crime former President Trump has committed.

The court won’t be in session Wednesday or Friday. Michael Cohen’s cross-examination will continue on Thursday.

A MATTER OF LOYALTY. 

Starting the second day of direct examination by prosecutor Susan Hoffinger, Cohen claimed he had been Trump‘s personal counsel for “approximately 15 months.” When Hoffinger asked him why he lied for Trump, Cohen responded, “Out of loyalty and to protect him.” The disgraced attorney’s insistence on terms like “loyalty” and “respect” is likely why prosecutors focused so much with prior witnesses on Trump’s use of similar terms. Prosecutors had quotes using similar words from several books authored by Trump entered into the evidentiary record.

Much like Cohen‘s recollections of what Trump may or may not have said, his understanding of “loyalty” and “respect” isn’t derived from Trump but is his own. A secondary problem for the prosecution and Cohen’s discussion of “loyalty” is the fact that the disgraced attorney admitted to unethically recording a conversation with his client — over which he may have also perjured himself again.

COHEN ADMITS HE LIED TO CONGRESS.

As the morning wore on, Hoffinger — likely acknowledging her witness’s past inability to be truthful — asked Cohen to address his conviction for lying to Congress. The disgraced attorney explained the circumstances of his perjury charge and sentence. “They dealt with the Trump Tower Moscow real estate project, specifically the number of times that I claimed to have spoken to Mr. Trump about the project as well as the time period for those conversations,” Cohen testified.

Hoffinger next asked Cohen why he lied. “Because I was staying on Mr. Trump’s message that there was no Russia, Russia, Russia, and again in coordination with the joint defense team, that’s what was preferred,” he responded, appearing to mock a turn of phrase often used by Trump when the corporate media brings up the Russia Hoax.

THE TIMELINE STILL MAKES NO SENSE.

During yesterday’s testimony, The National Pulse highlighted an issue with Cohen and the District Attorney’s prosecutors’ timeline of alleged crimes. The alleged hush money repayments made to Cohen were all said to have occurred in 2017, well after the 2016 election, casting doubt on the prosecution’s assertion that the hush money payments were made to influence the election.

This morning, Cohen muddied the timeline even further, testifying that he continued to pressure individuals around both Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal to lie about their alleged affairs with Trump well into 2018. When asked why he continued to work on the Daniels and McDougal stories, Cohen replied: “In order to protect Mr. Trump.”

If the primary concern was the impact the Daniels and McDougal stories could have on the 2016 presidential election, Cohen offered no reason to the court and jury for continuing to work as a ‘fixer‘ on the stories nearly two years later.

NOTHING COHEN SAYS CAN BE BELIEVED. 

The disgraced and disbarred attorney spent much of the late morning describing a bevy of instances in which he claims he lied on behalf of former President Trump. District Attorney Alvin Bragg‘s prosecutors likely felt they had to go down this path as it would be exposed during Cohen’s cross-examination beginning in the afternoon.

However, Cohen‘s admissions of being untruthful to an almost pathological degree cast a shadow on the remainder of his direct examination. The one-time Trump associate claimed he spoke with the former President regarding the false statement he gave to the media about the hush money payment to Daniels. According to Cohen, he told Trump “that I had paid the money on his behalf without his knowledge because just because something isn’t true doesn’t mean it can’t hurt you and that I did it.”

Cohen then dubiously claimed Trump replied, “That’s good, good.”

STORMY DANIEL’S DENIAL.

In another moment, Cohen may have let slip that many of his actions were of his own accord. He testified that he was the one to inform former President Trump that Stormy Daniels would be issuing a statement denying the affair allegation. When asked by Hoffinger why he was the one who told Trump, Cohen responded, “One to get credit for expressing that I was continuing to ensure that he was protected and stayed loyal. And the other so we could have this matter taken care of.”

Cohen told Hoffinger that Stormy Daniels’s denial statement was false. When asked how he knew, Cohen responded it was because he had written the statement. Again, while his claim may appear damaging on the surface, it reinforces the contention that he is untrustworthy and lacks credibility.

The direct examination of Cohen did not improve from here in terms of bolstering his credibility. When the prosecution submitted his 2018 letter to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) regarding the Stormy Daniels payment, Cohen was asked why he had lied about the Trump Organization and campaign not having knowledge of the payment. Again, Cohen — without directly implicating Trump — said the letter was meant to be misleading “in order to protect Mr Trump, stay on message, demonstrate my continued loyalty.”

JUDGE MERCHAN’S INSTRUCTIONS. 

At this point, Judge Juan Merchan stopped the direct examination to instruct the jury regarding Cohen’s FEC letter and statement. He told the jurors that Cohen’s statement was only admissible in the context of their assessment of the serial perjurer’s credibility as a witness. Merchan continued, instructing the jury that the fact that an FEC investigation into the Trump campaign occurred was not admissible and should have no bearing on their deliberations.

A little over an hour later, Judge Merchan issued a second set of jury instructions regarding Cohen having pleaded guilty to lying to Congress. Merchan said the guilty plea was not to have any bearing as evidence of Trump‘s guilt but could be used to assess Cohen’s credibility.

“Mr. Cohen’s plea is not evidence of the defendant’s guilt, and you may not consider it in determining whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty of the charged crimes,” Merchan said.

COHEN ‘STOPPED LYING IN 2018.’

The prosecution’s direct examination of Cohen wound down just before the court broke for lunch. Hoffinger walked Cohen through how he communicated with other business associates and confidants within the Trump orbit. In addition, the context and whether the recording Cohen had made of his conversation with Donald Trump regarding David Pecker and the McDougal payment was altered in any way was raised again.

“At any time, did you alter or modify the audio recording of your conversation with Mr. Trump as contained in PX246?” Hoffinger asked Cohen. He replied, “No, ma’am.”

The disgraced attorney told the jury that he hasn’t lied since 2018, suggesting that the several criminal cases against him and his subsequent three-year prison sentence caused him to have a moral revelation. “I regret doing things for him that I should not have — lying, bullying people in order to effectuate a goal. I don’t regret working with the Trump Organization,” Cohen said. Again, he stopped short of firmly stating he was ordered to do anything illegal. Instead, Cohen again focused on the need to “keep the loyalty.”

CROSS-EXAMINATION BEGINS.

Former President Trump‘s lead defense attorney, Todd Blanche, handled Michael Cohen‘s cross-examination and the long-expected fireworks kicking off immediately. “You went on TikTok and called me a crying little sh*t,” asked Blanche in an opening salvo. Cohen responded, “Sounds like something I would say.” As Cohen finished, prosecutors frantically objected to the question, which Judge Merchan sustained, striking the question and response from the record.

Blanche’s opening strategy appears to have been to paint Cohen as someone who runs their mouth and still demeans others, undermining his claims to have turned a new leaf.

Taking another shot at Cohen’s credibility and personal investment in the trial outcome, Blanche asked: “Is this trial important to you, Mr. Cohen?” The disgraced attorney answered: “Personally, yes.”

COHEN HAMMERED ON TIKTOK POSTS.

After lunch, Blanche spent a sustained period hammering Cohen on his social media posts throughout the trial. “You also talked on social media, during this trial, about President Trump, have you not?” Trump‘s attorney asked Cohen. The serial perjurer replied: “Sounds correct, yes.”

Addressing Michael Cohen’s TikTok video posts, Blanche asked him if he had referred to Trump as a “dictator douchebag.” Cohen again acknowledged that he likely had. “On that same TikTok on April 23, you referred to President Trump when he left the courtroom — you said that he goes right into that little cage, which is where he belongs in a f**king cage like an animal?” Blanche asked Cohen next.

“I recall saying that,” Cohen responded.

Blanche’s line of questioning served two purposes. One illustrates the extreme degree of hostility Cohen still holds for former President Trump, which could color his testimony as possibly false or biased. The other highlights Cohen’s hazy recollection of recent comments. During the prosecution’s direct examination, Cohen was able to recall — evidently in great detail — conversations between five and ten years old with former President Trump.

A HAZY MEMORY. 

“Do you remember in February 2021, you were going on TV talking about the investigation?” Blanche asked Cohen, referring to the District Attorney investigation prior to Bragg’s indictment of Trump. Cohen could not give a concrete response, instead replying: “I go on TV often, so I’m not sure what the topic was.”

Blanche continued to press Cohen, asking him if he had often talked to the press about the investigation. Cohen, again, refused to give a firm answer, stating instead: “It sounds correct.”

The response prompted another terse exchange between Blanche and Cohen, with Trump‘s defense attorney firing back: “I don’t want it to sound correct. Is it correct?” Michael Cohen finally relented, responding, “Yes, it would be correct.”

Zeroing in on conversations Cohen had with his attorney, Lanny Davis, regarding media appearances, Blanche drew Cohen’s memory problems out into the open for the jury: “You testified yesterday about very specific recollections that you have about telephone conversations you had with President Trump in 2016 — but you have no recollection that last month just over a year ago that you promised the district attorney that you would stop going on TV?”

“What I was saying to you, sir, I don’t recall even having these conversations with Lanny Davis about not going on television,” Cohen replied before adding: “I recall the conversations with President Trump at the time, yes.”

COHEN MAKES MONEY OFF TRUMP.

Moving on, Blanche focused on Cohen’s financial motivations for attacking and ostensibly lying about former President Trump. He asked Cohen about his social media activity, specifically his TikTok videos. Cohen testified he spends about an hour on TikTok every night. When Blanche asked if he makes money off his social media posts, Cohen admitted he does but contended, “It’s not significant.”

Continuing the social media theme, Blanche asked Cohen if he uses TikTok to make money. The serial perjurer replied, “Money is made from it, yes.”

“That’s not my question. One of the reasons you do it is to make money, yes or no?” Blanche fired back.

“Yes,” is all Cohen said in response.

OBSESSION.

Cohen’s ‘obsession’ with Trump was the final theme of Blanche’s cross-examination before the court adjourned for the day. Blanche read a series of glowing statements about Trump that Cohen has made over the years. “At the time, you weren’t lying, right?” Trump’s defense attorney asked Cohen. “At that time, I was knee-deep into the cult of Donald Trump, yes,” Cohen responded, adding: “I was not lying, it’s how I felt.”

Blanche asked Cohen if he was obsessed with Donald Trump. “I wouldn’t say obsessed. I admired him tremendously,” Cohen replied. He continued: “I can’t recall using that word. I wouldn’t say it would be wrong.”

Pivoting into a darker form of obsession, Blanche confronted Cohen over claims he now wants to see Trump in prison: “Have you regularly commented on your podcasts that you want President Trump to be convicted in this case?”

“Yes, probably,” Cohen responded.

When pressed further on why he responded with “probably,” Cohen said: “Because I don’t specifically know if I used those words, but yes, I would like to see that.”

You can read The National Pulse’s Day Twelve trial coverage here, and if you find our work worthwhile, consider joining as a supporter.

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.

NY Times Editor Tearfully Grovels to Sarah Palin in Court Testimony.

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: James Bennet, a former opinion editor for the New York Times, apologized to Sarah Palin during a federal court hearing about a 2017 editorial that falsely linked her political action committee to a 2011 shooting incident.

👥 Who’s Involved: James Bennet, Sarah Palin, Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-AZ), U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff, and Steve Scalise (R-LA).

📍 Where & When: The event took place in federal court on Thursday during a revived defamation trial.

💬 Key Quote: “I did, and I do apologize to Gov. Palin for this mistake,” said James Bennet during his testimony.

⚠️ Impact: Bennet’s apology did not move Palin, who is scheduled to testify next week. The case has been reopened due to procedural errors acknowledged by an appeals court.

IN FULL:

During testimony in a federal libel case, former New York Times opinion editor James Bennet expressed remorse to Sarah Palin for a 2017 editorial that inaccurately linked her political action committee to a 2011 shooting. Bennet, tearful and emotional on the stand, admitted to having “blew it” by erroneously connecting a graphic from Palin’s Political Action Committee (PAC) to the attack that severely injured Rep. Gabby Giffords and killed six individuals. He openly apologized to Palin, acknowledging the error publicly.

The case centers around an editorial penned after a shooting incident at a congressional baseball game practice in 2017, where then-House GOP Whip Steve Scalise was badly injured. The editorial referenced a map from Palin’s PAC that displayed Democratic districts under crosshairs, incorrectly suggesting that it incited the earlier 2011 violence. The New York Times subsequently issued a correction to clarify that there was no such link.

Judge Jed Rakoff praised Bennet’s apology as both “heartfelt” and “moving.” Despite the sincerity expressed in court, Palin remained unaffected, indicating outside the courthouse that the lapse in truth had occurred years prior. She expressed skepticism over the timing of the acknowledgment, referring to it as “untruth,” and dismissed the emotional tone of the apology. Palin is expected to take the stand next week to present her testimony in the case.

The New York Times initially successfully navigated the legal challenges in 2022, with Bennet’s assertion that the misinformation was unintentional proving substantial in that case. However, procedural errors identified by an appeals court have paved the way for a second trial, granting Palin another opportunity to present her defamation contention against the newspaper.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

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.

$1 Billion in Savings Claimed by DOGE Disappears From Website.

PULSE POINTS:

What Happened: Almost $1 billion in reported savings was removed from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) website. The figures disappeared overnight on Tuesday, including a significant $367 million cut related to a contract with the Acacia Center for Justice.

👥 Who’s Involved: The Department of Government Efficiency, fronted by Elon Musk.

📍 Where & When: The removal occurred online from the DOGE website on Tuesday.

💬 Key Quote: Elon Musk described the efforts at DOGE as “a revolution,” emphasizing the role of the department in identifying inefficiencies.

⚠️ Impact: This incident contributes to a pattern of altering and removing savings figures on DOGE’s part. It raises questions about the accuracy of the savings reported and the reliability of projected savings, which have been reduced from $1 trillion to $150 billion.

IN FULL:

Elon Musk is at the center of an incident involving the disappearance of nearly $1 billion in declared savings by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Overnight on Tuesday, these savings figures were removed from DOGE’s website, including a significant $367 million cut dealing with services for unaccompanied illegal immigrant minors by the Acacia Center for Justice.

This revelation continues a pattern where DOGE’s previously claimed savings undergo adjustments or removal due to inaccuracies. The National Pulse previously reported that Musk, in his role with DOGE, informed the Trump White House during a cabinet meeting that the projected savings figures have been decreased from an estimated $1 trillion to a new figure of $150 billion. Musk’s responsibility includes identifying inefficiencies within federal agencies and departments to help reduce overall government spending.

The technology billionaire and CEO of SpaceX and Tesla has said his approach to DOGE’s efforts is akin to “a revolution,” giving the appearance that the agency is seeking significant cuts and radical reform to address the bloated government bureaucracy However, the recent adjustments point to discrepancies that challenge DOGE’s reporting credibility and necessitate scrutiny regarding the accuracy of declared savings.

Reports indicate that over 600 grants that were allegedly reduced or cut by DOGE have been removed from the agency website over the last month, with a bulk of the removals occurring Tuesday night. Even more troubling, a number of the cuts claimed by DOGE appear to have been to programs that had their funding reduced or zeroed out prior to 2025, with some having been ended during Trump’s first term in office. DOGE’s data issues raise concerns about whether Musk and his agency are giving President Trump and the American people the most accurate picture of their efforts to reduce government waste, fraud, and abuse.

Image by Gage Skidmore.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

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.

Republicans Press Proof of Citizenship and Voter ID.

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: Republican lawmakers in numerous state legislatures across the United States have put forward proposals aimed at requiring documentary proof of citizenship and voter identification to register to vote and obtain a ballot.

👥 Who’s Involved: Republican legislators, President Donald J. Trump, the Brennan Center for Justice, the Voting Rights Lab, and other advocacy groups are involved in the ongoing discussions and actions regarding these voter regulations.

📍 Where & When: Proposed in various states across the U.S., these legislative actions have followed Trump’s influence in the aftermath of the 2024 elections.

IN FULL:

Amid ongoing debates about election security, Republican lawmakers across nearly half of U.S. state legislatures have introduced bills targeting stricter voting requirements. These efforts focus on requiring documentary proof of citizenship for voter registration and mandating photo identification to cast ballots. Conservative groups in states like California are pushing for ballot measures alongside these legislative efforts.

In Pennsylvania, a Republican legislator has proposed a voter ID law in the swing state, drawing parallels to voter decisions in Wisconsin favoring stricter identification laws. These legislative moves resonate with President Donald Trump’s emphasis on election integrity.

The legislative efforts coincide with the U.S. House’s approval of the Save Act, a bill requiring voter citizenship proof and limiting registration methods. This bill reflects a broader push for tighter regulations nationwide. Trump has further backed these measures through an executive order emphasizing the need for citizenship documentation.

States such as New Hampshire and Louisiana have enacted laws requiring proof of citizenship for voting, with other states like Texas considering similar proposals. Alongside these laws, some states have enacted or proposed additional restrictions, including limiting who may assist voters with ballots and measures affecting absentee ballot processes.

Critics, such as Andrew Garber of the far-left Brennan Center, argue these initiatives are based on unfounded allegations of voter fraud that risk disenfranchising eligible voters. But left-leaning groups have yet to show anyone who has been disenfranchised besides those who are not eligible to vote in the first instance.

Besides legislative actions, state-level initiatives have seen challenges to direct democracy processes, as exemplified by moves in Arkansas and South Dakota. A judicial challenge in North Carolina by Jefferson Griffin, a judge contesting his election loss, has underscored the contentious nature of voting rights debates. The state appellate court temporarily sided with Griffin’s call for voter eligibility proof pending further consideration by the state’s Supreme Court.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

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.
immigration

WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.

Anti-Open Borders Philosopher Denied Entry to UK Sparks Fresh Free Speech Debate.

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: French philosopher Renaud Camus was denied entry into the UK to speak about immigration, as his presence was deemed against the “public good” by the Home Office.

👥 Who’s Involved: Renaud Camus, the UK Home Office, and Vauban Books, the publisher of Camus’ work in English.

📍 Where & When: The ban was reported by the Telegraph, with Camus planning to speak in the UK later in the month.

💬 Key Quote: Camus stated that “of all the European governments guilty” of allowing unchecked migration, “the British government is one of the guiltiest.”

⚠️ Impact: The decision raises debates over free speech in the UK, especially on immigration issues; the Government emphasizes tackling harmful beliefs.

IN FULL:

French philosopher Renaud Camus has been prohibited from entering the United Kingdom, the nation’s Home Office confirmed. The 78-year-old was scheduled to deliver a speech on immigration, but his electronic travel authorisation (ETA) application was denied. According to an email obtained by the Telegraph, the Home Office stated that Camus’ entry was “not considered to be conducive to the public good.”

Camus, known for his stance against mass immigration and its potential impact on European demography, maintains that unchecked immigration could result in the demographic “replacement” of Europe’s indigenous populations. Upon learning about the travel restriction, Camus described the UK government as “one of the guiltiest” in Europe for its open borders, mass migration policies.

Vauban Books, the English publisher of Camus’s work, criticized the decision, suggesting it signifies a departure from the core values of liberal democracy and free speech. They emphasized the importance of Camus’s voice, juxtaposing it against what they describe as the current UK Government’s “serial betrayals.”

Camus was expected to speak at an event organized by the small and fringe Homeland Party, known for its nationalist stances and its links to Neo-Nazis.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

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.

Trump Criticizes Democrat Senator’s Visit to El Salvador as Attention-Seeking.

PULSE POINTS:

What Happened: President Donald J. Trump criticized Senator Chris Van Hollen for his visit to El Salvador, where the senator met with Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an illegal immigrant allegedly deported without due process.

👥 Who’s Involved: President Trump, Senator Chris Van Hollen, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, and DHS Secretary Kristi Noem.

📍 Where & When: El Salvador, Truth Social, Friday morning.

💬 Key Quote: “Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland looked like a fool yesterday standing in El Salvador begging for attention from the Fake News Media, or anyone. GRANDSTANDER!!!” – President Trump.

⚠️ Impact: The Democrat senator is under fire for showing an inordinate amount of care for an illegal alien gang member, while having remained largely silent on the victims of migrant crime, such as Laken Riley and Rachel Morin.

IN FULL:

President Donald J. Trump has publicly criticized Maryland Senator Chris Van Hollen following the Democrat’s visit to El Salvador. Van Hollen was there to take up the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia—an illegal immigrant, accused MS-13 gang member, and domestic abuser—deported to his native country under the Alien Enemies Act. Trump expressed his disapproval through a post on Truth Social on Friday morning, dismissing Van Hollen’s actions as attention-seeking.

“Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland looked like a fool yesterday standing in El Salvador begging for attention from the Fake News Media, or anyone. GRANDSTANDER!!!” the America First leader wrote. Initially, Van Hollen was not able to meet with Garcia or even speak to him over the phone, but an in-person meeting was eventually arranged.

Photos of the meeting between Van Hollen and Abrego Garcia show them sharing a drink, speculated by some to be a margarita, sparking varied reactions. Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele remarked, “Kilmar Abrego Garcia, miraculously risen from the ‘death camps’ & ‘torture’, now sipping margaritas with Sen. Van Hollen in the tropical paradise of El Salvador!”

He later added, “Now that he’s been confirmed healthy, he gets the honor of staying in El Salvador’s custody.”

The relaxed atmosphere in the photos of Van Hollen’s meeting contrasts sharply with the stern images of the CECOT mega-prison, where some gangsters deported to El Salvador are held. Van Hollen said he had passed on a “message of love” from Garcia to his wife, who previously filed a protective order against him, complaining she was “afraid to be close to him” after receiving several beatings.

Photographs of Garcia’s meeting with Van Hollen show him sporting many tattoos, with social media users arguing that ink visible on his knuckles indicates he is a member of MS-13, as police informants attested in the U.S.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

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.

American Citizen Convicted Over Self-Defense Stabbing of Migrant Who Groped Her.

PULSE POINTS:

What Happened: A 20-year-old German-American woman has been convicted in Germany after she stabbed a 64-year-old Eritrean asylum seeker who groped her at a railway station in 2024.

👥 Who’s Involved: A 20-year-old German woman with U.S. citizenship, a 64-year-old Eritrean asylum seeker, Alem Tekeste, and German prosecutors.

📍 Where & When: A 2024 stabbing incident at a Kaiserslautern, Germany, railway station; the trial began earlier this month.

💬 Key Quote: “If you are no longer in an emergency situation, you become the attacker yourself,” the German judge insisted, despite evidence that the migrant man had continued to assault the woman before she stabbed him.

⚠️ Impact: The 20-year-old German-American woman, identified only as Fallyn B, received a two-year suspended sentence after being convicted of manslaughter.

IN FULL:

A 20-year-old German-American dual national, identified in court documents only as Fallyn B, has been convicted of manslaughter in a German court, stemming from a 2024 incident where she fatally stabbed a 64-year-old Eritrean asylum seeker after he groped her buttocks in a Kaiserslautern, Germany, railway station. While attorneys representing the woman maintained that she merely wished to keep the Eritrean man—identified as Alem Tekeste—at a distance, German prosecutors insisted that she could have avoided killing the migrant during the incident last summer. Notably, defendants do not have a right to a trial by a jury of their peers in Germany, with judges determining guilt.

The conviction marks a concerning turn for criminal justice in the European country, which has seen a spike in violent crime perpetrated by migrants and asylum seekers. Notably, her defense was predicated on the fact that not only did Tekeste grope her on an escalator in the station—an act the court and prosecutors acknowledged was criminal—but that he proceeded to follow her and attempted to grab her buttocks again, leading to the fatal stabbing. This recollection of events was confirmed by security camera footage and eyewitness testimony that demonstrated Tekeste did indeed follow the woman and attempted to grope her again as she walked through an underpass. It was during this second groping attempt that the woman produced a pocket knife that she used to defend herself, stabbing the African migrant fatally in the chest.

Despite the concrete evidence confirming her actions were in self-defense, German prosecutors insisted that Tekeste had retreated after the knife was produced and that the woman proceeded to pursue him, escalating the confrontation before Tekeste reached for the woman’s knife, resulting in her stabbing him. Notably, the woman fled the station immediately after the stabbing, texting a friend: “I think I just killed someone.” She proceeded to promptly turn herself in, indicating that she had no intention of killing the man.

The judge presiding over the trial bizarrely excoriated the German-American woman, telling her at the sentencing: “If you are no longer in an emergency situation, you become the attacker yourself.” However, even this claim was called into question during the trial by the defense, producing an eyewitness who testified that the woman screamed “Don’t touch me!” during the attack. Even more concerning, the court ignored Tekeste’s past criminal history. The migrant was fined at least four times in 2024 for sexual harassment and was a known criminal figure to local authorities.

The manslaughter conviction comes with a two-year suspended sentence, meaning she will serve no jail time if she completes 500 hours of community service and attends a mandatory drug counseling program.

Image by Nika Poznyak. 

show less

PULSE POINTS:

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.

Wikipedia Escalates Attacks on J.D. Vance With Nearly 1,000 ‘Edits’ to His Page.

PULSE POINTS:

What Happened: Wikipedia editors extensively revised Vice President J.D. Vance’s page during the 2024 presidential campaign and its aftermath, significantly increasing negative content.

👥 Who’s Involved: Vice President J.D. Vance, Wikipedia editors, President Donald J. Trump, MRC Free Speech America, and various media outlets.

📍 Where & When: United States, particularly Ohio; focus periods include Vance’s campaign announcements in 2021 and 2024.

💬 Key Quote: “Wikipedia editors flooded Vance’s page with 883 edits during the GOP vice presidential sweepstakes in the lead-up to Vance’s debut at the Republican National Convention—far more activity than the mere 500 edits made in a five-year span from March 2017 through May 2022,” the MRC report notes.

⚠️ Impact: During critical political phases, Vance’s public image was reshaped with heightened negativity.

IN FULL:

A recent examination of edits made to the Wikipedia page for Vice President J.D. Vance reveals that the online, open-source encyclopedia’s editors made substantial edits amplifying negative content during and after his selection as President Donald J. Trump‘s running mate. The research, published by MRC Free Speech America, found that in the months leading up to Vance being tapped as Trump’s vice presidential nominee at the 2024 Republican National Convention (RNC), his Wikipedia page saw nearly double the number of edits made compared to the cumulative total over the five years prior.

“Wikipedia editors flooded Vance’s page with 883 edits during the GOP vice presidential sweepstakes in the lead-up to Vance’s debut at the Republican National Convention—far more activity than the mere 500 edits made in a five-year span from March 2017 through May 2022—signaling a clear attempt to negatively reshape his public image,” MRC states, noting: “This mass editing began soon after legacy media floated Vance as a possible Trump running mate.”

The edits made to Vance’s entry on the free online encyclopedia almost uniformly use partisan-style talking points to highlight allegedly negative aspects of the Vice President’s background. Instead of a viewpoint-neutral source of information on Vance, his Wikipedia page essentially became a dumping point for Democratic Party talking points and opposition research. This effectively allowed the corporate media to use Wikipedia’s perceived ‘legitimacy’ as a fig leaf to cover their laundering of a partisan Democrat narrative.

Despite Vance having on multiple occasions stated his opinion of President Trump had changed significantly after 2016, Wikipedia editors altered the Vice President’s page to amplify his nearly decade-old criticisms of the America First leader while downplaying his subsequent support for Trump’s policies and leadership. The edits, mostly occurring before Vance was formally announced as the vice presidential nominee, appear to have been intended to undermine his chances of being named as Trump’s running mate.

Additionally, the editors are accused of presenting Vance’s nonprofit work regarding the opioid crisis in a negative light, suggesting ties to Big Pharma. This was further compounded by contentious portrayals of his acclaimed book Hillbilly Elegy, which Wikipedia did not emphasize prior to his entry into national politics.

The findings published by MRC mirror a pattern found with other Trump administration officials. Previously, the media watchdog group found that Wikipedia editors made similar partisan interventions with the page entries for Pete Hegseth, Tulsi Gabbard, and Kash Patel. The National Pulse previously reported that Wikipedia’s cofounder, Larry Sanger, warned that the massive open-source online encyclopedia is likely ideologically corrupted due to the efforts of its former chief executive, Katherine Maher. Maher led the Wikimedia Foundation, which oversees the online resource, before she was hired as the CEO of NPR.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

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.

Sen. Jim Banks Wants to Boost Tax Credits for Families and Expectant Mothers.

PULSE POINTS:

What Happened: Indiana Senator Jim Banks introduced the Family First Act, proposing increased tax credits for families with children and pregnant women.

👥 Who’s Involved: Republican Sen. Jim Banks, with supportive comments from Rep. Blake Moore (R-UT).

📍 Where & When: Introduced in the U.S. Senate on Wednesday.

💬 Key Quote: “Congress needs to do everything we can to help parents give their kids a shot at the American Dream,” Banks said.

⚠️ Impact: The bill aims to provide financial relief to parents and expectant mothers, adjusting tax policies and credits to support family formation.

IN FULL:

Senator Jim Banks (R-IN) has introduced new legislation aiming to provide tax relief for American families and pregnant women. The proposal, named the Family First Act, seeks to increase the child tax credit to $4,200 for families with children aged zero to five and $3,000 for those with children aged six to 17. The Act also proposes a novel $2,800 tax credit for expectant mothers.

Banks emphasized that Congress has a vital role in assisting parents to help their children achieve the American Dream, highlighting measures within the bill such as tax reductions, eradication of marriage penalties, and streamlined benefits for hardworking families. The proposed changes would require families to have an income of at least $20,000 to receive full child tax credit benefits or $10,000 during pregnancies, favoring those in gainful employment. Each recipient of the child tax credit would also need a Social Security Number for the parent and child.

The proposal would do away with the Head of Household tax filing status and also streamline the existing Earned Income Tax Credit. Current provisions for the child tax credit, initially expanded during 2021 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, reportedly lifted approximately 2.9 million children out of poverty, based on U.S. Census Bureau data.

In addition, the Family First Act aims to eliminate the State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction that some taxpayers use when filing federal taxes. The Earned Income Tax Credit would be overhauled to ensure the family portion doesn’t vary based on the number of dependents, aiming to maintain or enhance tax cuts for families.

Representative Blake Moore (R-UT) has expressed support for the legislation, saying, “This fiscally responsible approach affirms the dignity of work and promotes marriage, supporting families as they build stronger and more prosperous communities for the next generation.”

Birthrates are currently below replacement in the United States and the West generally, creating pressure for them to accept mass migration from non-Western countries to address demographic challenges. Pro-family policies like Banks’s could provide an alternative to this economically questionable approach, without the social issues accompanying a large influx of people from less compatible cultures.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

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.

White House Relaunches ‘COVID.gov’ Site to Expose Fauci, the Lab Leak, and China.

PULSE POINTS:

WHAT HAPPENED: The Trump White House relaunched COVID.gov to outline how Fauci and U.S. agencies allegedly buried the COVID lab leak theory to protect China.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Dr. Fauci, EcoHealth’s Peter Daszak, NIH staff, and Biden’s HHS are accused of funding, obstructing, and covering up dangerous research.

🧾KEY QUOTES: Fauci admitted the 6-foot rule “sort of just appeared”; Daszak accused of giving “false statements to Congress.”

⚠️FALLOUT: HHS suspended EcoHealth’s funding; DOJ and Congress are investigating. NIH officials could face legal consequences.

📌SIGNIFICANCE: The government’s COVID narrative is finally being corrected by the U.S. government.

IN FULL:

The Trump White House has drastically repurposed the COVID.gov website into a public-facing indictment of the pandemic establishment, accusing Anthony Fauci, federal agencies, and international bodies of suppressing the truth about COVID-19’s origins. The news comes as Trump tightens the screws on the Chinese Communist Party. The National Pulse understands the COVID.gov website does massive amounts of organic web traffic.

The revamped site now leads with the claim that the virus likely leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology and that Fauci helped orchestrate the now-infamous “Proximal Origin” paper to shut down the lab leak theory, both stories that were first broken here on The National Pulse.

Supporting the charge: evidence of gain-of-function research funded by U.S. taxpayers through EcoHealth Alliance–another entity first exposed by The National Pulse–as well as the early illness of Wuhan lab workers, and internal NIH communications that suggest efforts to avoid transparency laws. Dr. David Morens, Fauci’s top advisor, is accused of deleting federal records, lying to Congress, and sharing nonpublic info with EcoHealth’s Peter Daszak.

EcoHealth is under federal investigation, NIH’s oversight process is labeled a “national security threat,” and HHS is accused of dragging its feet to protect high-ranking officials. Even the World Health Organization is slammed for pushing China’s interests, with the site warning that the WHO’s “Pandemic Treaty” could further compromise U.S. sovereignty.

The site also torches domestic policies: calling lockdowns medically reckless, mask mandates unscientific, and social distancing arbitrary. In closed-door testimony, Fauci reportedly admitted the six-foot rule “sort of just appeared.” Former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s nursing home order is branded “medical malpractice,” with claims his administration redacted and withheld damning documents to dodge accountability.

The message on the new site is blunt: the American public wasn’t just misled—it was manipulated, censored, and endangered by a bureaucracy desperate to protect itself and its partners in Beijing. The website is available here.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

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.

CIA Director Brands China Greatest Historical Adversary, Priority Threat.

PULSE POINTS:

What Happened: Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Director John Ratcliffe has emphasized China’s position as the top focus for the agency, highlighting the challenges posed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

👥 Who’s Involved: John Ratcliffe, CIA staff, and the Chinese Communist Party.

📍 Where & When: CIA headquarters, internal memo released, highlighted by a senior official on Thursday.

💬 Key Quote: “No adversary in the history of our Nation has presented a more formidable challenge or a more capable strategic competitor than the Chinese Communist Party.” — John Ratcliffe

⚠️ Impact: The CIA will intensify efforts to counter China’s global influence and technological advancements, while also addressing threats from other nations like Russia and Iran.

IN FULL:

Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Director John Ratcliffe has declared China the agency’s foremost priority in an internal memo sent to staff. The memo, shared by a senior official, outlines Ratcliffe’s concerns about the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), describing it as an unprecedented adversary seeking to challenge the United States on economic, military, and technological fronts.

Ratcliffe’s communication underscores a strategic shift within the CIA to respond proactively to China’s growing global influence. He emphasized the need for the agency to act with “urgency, creativity, and grit” in mitigating these threats. The CIA is expected to seek innovative and long-term solutions to maintain a strategic edge over China.

In addressing the memo, Ratcliffe also pointed to the importance of technology, highlighting areas like artificial intelligence and quantum computing as crucial to future national security. “No adversary in the history of our Nation has presented a more formidable challenge or a more capable strategic competitor than the Chinese Communist Party,” Ratcliffe said in the memo.

Image by Steve Webel.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

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.