Democratic senators fear polls are underestimating former President Donald J. Trump’s level of support. RealClearPolitics gave Vice President Kamala Harris a lead of 2.2 points nationally as of Monday, September 23—a narrower margin than Joe Biden’s seven-point lead and Hillary Clinton’s three-point lead over Trump at similar times in the 2020 and 2016 election campaigns. On election night, Biden’s lead over Trump nationally was significantly lower, at four points. Clinton‘s was also lower, at 2.1 points—and she lost the Electoral College.
One Democratic senator, speaking anonymously, called the numbers “ominous,” adding: “There’s no question that [they are] concerning… My sense is there’s not a lot more you can do than we’re already doing.”
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
Another anonymous senator lamented, “I don’t think any poll right now means much of anything,” complaining that voters are looking back on the Trump economy as “being so good” compared to the Biden-Harris economy.
Democratic pollster Celinda Lake told the media, “I, too, share the concern that there are going to be some surprises” on election day.
“What accentuates my concern is when you poll people who have not voted in ’20 but are planning to vote today, they are disproportionately Trump voters,” she added.
A poll earlier this month also shows Trump gaining major ground among independents and Latino voters, leading over Harris in both groups.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: A federal lawsuit has been filed against Tesla and will go before a jury. Plaintiffs argue that the Autopilot system failed to function properly ahead of a fatal crash, that the technology’s capabilities have been overstated, and Tesla acted with reckless disregard for safety for profit.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Tesla, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Dillion Angulo, the family of Nabiel Benavides, George Brian McGee, and Elon Musk
📍WHEN & WHERE: Miami, Florida, July 14, 2025
💬KEY QUOTE: “A reasonable jury could find that Tesla acted in reckless disregard of human life for the sake of developing their product and maximizing profit.” – Judge Beth Bloom
🎯IMPACT: The case could alter Tesla’s reputation and influence future regulations on the Autopilot technology.
IN FULL
A lawsuit tied to a 2019 fatal crash involving Tesla’s Autopilot system will proceed to a jury trial in federal court this week. The civil case stems from a collision that killed Nabiel Benavides and seriously injured Dillion Angulo after the driver, George Brian McGee, allegedly activated Autopilot while distracted.
The proceedings will take place at the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida and mark the first time a jury will hear arguments about the responsibility of Tesla’s Autopilot system in a fatal accident. The plaintiffs argue the company exaggerated the system’s capabilities and failed to include safety features that could have prevented the crash.
Tesla has denied the allegations, asserting the crash was not caused by its technology. The company claims that the driver overrode Autopilot by pressing the accelerator and that all crash responsibility lies with him. “The evidence clearly shows that this crash had nothing to do with Tesla’s Autopilot technology,” a spokesman said.
However, court filings indicate the vehicle’s onboard systems recorded data showing it recognized obstacles ahead, including a parked SUV and a pedestrian. The plaintiffs argue that Tesla’s emergency braking system failed to engage and that Elon Musk misled the public on what Autopilot could actually do.
Judge Beth Bloom, who is overseeing the case, stated in a recent ruling that a jury could find Tesla acted “in reckless disregard of human life” in its pursuit of technological advancement and market share. Her decision clears the way for a high-stakes trial that could impact how driver-assist systems are regulated nationwide.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Metadata from surveillance footage of the facility where Jeffrey Epstein died shows nearly three minutes were trimmed, contradicting claims that the video was “full raw” and raising fresh doubts about the official narrative.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), WIRED, Attorney General Pam Bondi, and President Donald J. Trump
📍WHEN & WHERE: New York and Washington, D.C., July 2025
💬KEY QUOTE: “Refer you to the FBI.” – Natalie Baldassarre, DOJ Public Affairs Officer
🎯IMPACT: The edited footage, released amid rising demands for accountability, has reignited skepticism around Jeffrey Epstein’s death, and intensified calls for full disclosure in the Epstein investigation.
IN FULL
Newly revealed metadata shows that almost three minutes were removed from surveillance footage the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) had described as “full raw” from outside pedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein’s prison cell before he was found dead. Though the Trump administration released the video to demonstrate transparency, the findings have instead raised renewed concerns about potential omissions in critical evidence.
Forensic experts verified that the supposedly “raw” video was edited in Adobe Premiere Pro from two separate files. The first clip was shortened by nearly three minutes, ending precisely at 11:58:58 pm—just ahead of a known one-minute camera lapse attributed by officials to an automatic system reset. The second clip resumes at 12:00:00 am and continues through early morning. While DOJ officials maintain there was no tampering, the specific timing of the edit has drawn scrutiny.
A WIREDinvestigation confirmed that the video was saved and exported multiple times on May 23, 2025, between 4:48 PM and 8:16 PM. The footage includes internal markers used by analysts to flag notable moments, though the public version omits their descriptions. These flags correspond to movement near Epstein’s cell block at the Metropolitan Correctional Center.
A 2023 DOJ Inspector General report found that surveillance at the time of Epstein’s death was limited to two functioning cameras, both tied to outdated and unreliable systems. One captured common areas and stairwells near Epstein’s tier, but not the cell itself. Visibility of the stairway was also obstructed, and neither camera filmed directly inside the cell or at its door.
WIRED’s findings cast doubt on DOJ transparency under Attorney General Pam Bondi, and public pressure continues to mount for a complete and unaltered release of all surveillance evidence.
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: The co-founder of Glass House Farms—a marijuana operation raided by federal immigration agents who uncovered child labor and detained 361 illegal immigrant workers, including 14 minors—has been revealed to be a donor to Governor Gavin Newsom (D-CA).
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Glass House Farms co-founder Graham Farra, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Gov. Gavin Newsom, and protestors.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The raid occurred last Thursday at Glass House Farms in Ventura County, California.
💬KEY QUOTE: “Glass House has never knowingly violated applicable hiring practices and does not and has never employed minors.” – Glass House Brands statement via X.
🎯IMPACT: The raid sparked violent clashes between protestors and agents, raised questions about labor practices, and brought scrutiny to political donations by Glass House Farms’ co-founder.
IN FULL
The co-founder of Glass House Farms, Graham Farra, has donated substantial sums to California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) and other Democrats, according to campaign finance records. Farra’s company, Glass House Farms, was raided by federal agents last Thursday, resulting in the detention of 361 illegal immigrants, including 14 minors. The raid turned violent, with one worker falling to his death from a greenhouse.
Glass House Brands, the parent company of Glass House Farms, issued a statement on X asserting, “Glass House has never knowingly violated applicable hiring practices and does not and has never employed minors.” Farra himself posted on X, stating, “We are focused on taking care of our people and our plants,” though the post was later deleted.
Farra has a history of political contributions to Democrat causes, including a $10,000 donation to Newsom in 2018 and contributions to the Santa Barbara County Democratic Central Committee’s federal PAC and Rep. Salud Carbajal (D-CA).
Newsom’s only comment on the campaign donor revelation was to deflect in a post on X, stating, “Sure is rich for Fox News and the Trump Admin to point to campaign donations to Democrats, when in fact, the CEO is a Trump supporter who donated to my recall and has given to more Republicans.”
The company, co-founded by Farra and Kyle Kazan, has built its reputation on claims of sustainable and ethical cannabis farming. Kazan, a former police officer and teacher, reportedly supports President Donald J. Trump. Glass House Brands has not commented on the recent allegations.
Assistant DHS Secretary Tricia McLaughlin described the conditions at the farm as resembling “exploitation, forced child labor, and potentially human trafficking or smuggling while facing assault and even gunfire.” Among those detained was Mexican national Juan Duarte-Velasquez, who had prior convictions for rape and DUI.
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: Official figures reveal over 1.26 million migrants are now claiming Universal Credit in Britain, a sharp increase from 883,470 in 2022.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Non-British nationals, including refugees and humanitarian visa holders, make up the claimants.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: Figures disclosed in 2025 by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).
💬KEY QUOTE: “Politicians claim that immigration is going to bring the best and brightest here, but we can see from the stats that’s not true. We are importing large numbers of people who will be a burden on taxpayers. This is madness and damaging our living standards.” – Neil O’Brien MP
🎯IMPACT: The rise in migrant claimants has prompted calls for welfare reform, with concerns over sustainability and fairness for taxpayers.
IN FULL
According to newly released official figures, more than 1.26 million migrants are now claiming Universal Credit (UC) welfare benefits in Britain. The number jumped from 883,470 in 2022 to over 1.26 million in 2024, a sharp increase in just two years. Data from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) shows European Union (EU) migrants represent the largest group, with 770,379 claimants. Additionally, 211,090 are non-EU nationals with Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR), 118,749 are refugees, 54,156 hold humanitarian visas, and 75,267 are on time-limited visas. A further 33,240 are classified as ‘other’.
Conservative MP Neil O’Brien criticized current policies, saying, “Politicians claim that immigration is going to bring the best and brightest here, but we can see from the stats that’s not true. We are importing large numbers of people who will be a burden on taxpayers. This is madness and damaging our living standards.”
The increase in migrant claimants has sparked debate over the sustainability of the British welfare system, with concerns about its impact on public finances and working families already facing a cost-of-living crisis. John O’Connell, Chief Executive of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, warned: “Britain is sleepwalking into a culture of worklessness, with millions of Brits effectively dumped onto the welfare pile, all the while the system appears as a treasure chest for foreign nationals.”
❓WHAT HAPPENED: President Donald J. Trump has not urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to consider striking Moscow and St. Petersburg, refuting a false report from the Financial Times regarding a call between the two leaders. Speaking to the press outside the White House, President Trump gave an emphatic “no” when asked if he thought the Ukrainians should launch strikes deep into Russia.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: President Donald J. Trump, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and Russian President Vladimir Putin.
📍WHEN & WHERE: Trump’s remarks refuting the Financial Times story were made outside the White House on Tuesday, July 15, 2025.
💬KEY QUOTE: “No, he shouldn’t target Moscow.” — President Trump
🎯IMPACT: Trump’s remarks push back against an earlier false report from the Financial Times that mischaracterized a phone call with Zelensky.
IN FULL
President Donald J. Trump clarified that Ukraine should not launch military strikes deep into Russia, including the targeting of Moscow and St. Petersburg. Trump’s remarks, made outside the White House on Tuesday afternoon, contradict an earlier false report from the Financial Times, which claimed that the America First leader had encouraged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to target the Russian cities.
The Financial Times claimed early Tuesday that during a conversation between the two leaders, Trump asked, “Volodymyr, can you hit Moscow? Can you hit St. Petersburg too?” Zelensky allegedly responded confidently, saying, “Absolutely. We can if you give us the weapons.” However, the Trump White House was quick to push back against the report, stating that the newspaper misinterpreted Trump’s comments to Zelensky.
Later Tuesday afternoon, President Trump addressed the false report directly while fielding questions outside the White House. “No, he shouldn’t target Moscow,” Trump said, responding to a question about his call with the Ukrainian leader. Trump went on to address a 50-day window he’s given to Russia to back down from hostilities or face a new round of severe sanctions: “No, I don’t think 50 days is very long, and it could be sooner than that. I don’t think 50 days is very long.”
As diplomatic avenues remain blocked, the war in Ukraine has entered a particularly violent phase. Russia has carried out a wave of intense bombardments across Ukrainian territory, with some of the heaviest attacks reported since the war began.
Cities in the western part of the country, including Lutsk and Ternopil, were among the hardest hit, while in the Kiev region, warehouses were set on fire by drone and missile strikes.
Christopher Tomlinson contributed to this report.
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: President Donald J. Trump said that the ‘Epstein Files’ are a Democrat hoax while fielding questions outside the White House on Tuesday.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: President Trump, Attorney General Pam Bondi, and deceased pedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein.
📍WHEN & WHERE: Tuesday, July 15, 2025.
💬KEY QUOTE: “I would say, that you know, these files were made up by Comey, they were made up by Obama, they were made up by Biden.” — President Trump
🎯IMPACT: Trump’s approval rating has taken a hit after Bondi and the DOJ released a memo on July 7 stating that Jeffrey Epstein had no “client list” and that no foul play was involved in his death.
IN FULL
President Donald J. Trump, leaving the White House en route to an artificial intelligence (AI) summit in Pittsburgh, briefly took questions from the press pool, stating that the ‘Epstein Files’ are a hoax made up by Democrats. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has come under public criticism, especially from Trump’s America First base, for its handling of documents related to the deceased pedophile financier’s alleged sexual blackmail ring.
“She’s given us just a very quick briefing, and in terms of the credibility of the different things they’ve seen,” President Trump said regarding U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi‘s handling of the situation. He continued: “I would say that, you know, these files were made up by [former FBI Director James] Comey, they were made up by [Barack] Obama, they were made up by [Joe] Biden.”
“And we went through years of that, with the Russia-Russia-hoax, with all of the different things we had to go through, we’ve gone through years of it. But she’s handled it very well, and it’s going to be up to her. Whatever she thinks is credible, she should release.”
Notably, Trump’s approval rating has taken a hit after Bondi and the DOJ released a memo on July 7 stating that deceased pedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein had no “client list” and that no foul play was involved in his death. The memo contradicted Bondi’s statement earlier this year that such a client list was “sitting on [her] desk.”
The National Pulse reported on Monday that Lara Trump, the President’s daughter-in-law and former Republican National Committee (RNC) co-chairwoman, said she expects that more information related to Epstein’s criminal activities will be released, offering reassurance to those who believe the Trump administration is not revealing the full story.
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: The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) announced it has terminated federal contracts worth up to $2.8 billion, including $407 million in savings from 230 contracts cut last week.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: DOGE, established by President Donald J. Trump, along with various federal agencies such as the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Department of Labor (DOL).
📍WHEN & WHERE: Updates were shared on July 12 via DOGE’s social media and website, with actions spanning across federal agencies nationwide.
🎯IMPACT: DOGE claims its initiatives have saved $190 billion to date, equating to $1,180 per taxpayer, while the Senate debates additional spending cuts.
IN FULL
The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has revealed a significant initiative to cut federal spending, announcing that it has terminated contracts totaling as much as $2.8 billion. According to DOGE’s latest update, published on July 12, a total of 230 contracts were eliminated just last week, generating $407 million in savings.
Among the contracts recently canceled were a U.S. Department of Agriculture project described as a “Mexico sustainable landscapes consultant” and a Treasury Department program involving “mentoring, evaluation, learning specialist services in Haiti.” DOGE posted screenshots of the project descriptions on its official social media platforms to highlight examples of what it deemed unnecessary expenditures.
According to information provided on DOGE’s website, its ongoing work has resulted in estimated savings of approximately $190 billion since its inception. This figure translates to an average of $1,180 saved per taxpayer. The agency’s public database reports that around 11,700 federal contracts and 15,500 grants have been terminated to date, each category contributing roughly $44 billion in cuts. However, there have been some questions as to how legitimate some of these savings were during the period when Elon Musk fronted the agency.
As DOGE continues its cost-cutting mission, broader fiscal policy is also in focus. The U.S. Senate is preparing to vote on a proposed package of spending reductions, which includes a rescission of $9.4 billion from programs related to public broadcasting and foreign aid. President Donald J. Trump has voiced strong support for the plan, particularly targeting taxpayer funding for public media outlets.
“It is very important that all Republicans adhere to my Recissions Bill and, in particular, DEFUND THE CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC BROADCASTING (PBS and NPR), which is worse than CNN & MSDNC put together,” Trump posted on Truth Social. He has warned GOP lawmakers that failure to support the bill may cost them his endorsement.
Despite changes in leadership, including Musk‘s departure in May, who previously served as a special government employee and spokesman for the initiative, DOGE remains active.
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: Senator Tom Cotton has introduced legislation to end birthright citizenship for the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Senator Tom Cotton, President Donald J. Trump, Judge Joseph Laplante, and legal scholars.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The legislation was introduced on Tuesday, July 15, 2025, in the United States Senate.
💬KEY QUOTE: “There is no constitutional right for illegal aliens to cross the border to gain citizenship for their children,” said Senator Tom Cotton.
🎯IMPACT: The legislation seeks to address illegal immigration and align with Trump’s America First agenda by clarifying the scope of birthright citizenship.
IN FULL
Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) has introduced the Constitutional Citizenship Clarification Act, a bill that would end birthright citizenship for children born in the United States to illegal aliens. The legislation, introduced on Tuesday, would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to ensure that such children are not automatically granted American citizenship.
The bill also targets the children of foreign terrorists and spies, ensuring they are not rewarded with birthright citizenship. Cotton stated, “There is no constitutional right for illegal aliens to cross the border to gain citizenship for their children. Granting birthright citizenship to illegal aliens has contributed to the highest levels of illegal immigration in history. Fixing this will help reduce the damage from Joe Biden’s catastrophic border crisis.”
Notably, the legislation supports a key part of President Donald J. Trump’s immigration agenda. The America First leader has already sought to end birthright citizenship through an Executive Order. However, that order was blocked last week by U.S. District Court Judge Joseph Laplante, who certified a class action lawsuit against the policy.
Under the law prior to Trump’s executive order, anchor babies—as they are often called—are granted citizenship despite their parents having no substantial ties to the United States. Once these children reach adulthood, they can sponsor their parents and other relatives for green cards, effectively anchoring their families in the U.S. for generations. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, an estimated 225,000 to 250,000 anchor babies were born to illegal alien parents in 2023, representing about seven percent of all births in the country that year.
While the Supreme Court has never explicitly ruled that the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens must be granted birthright citizenship, the practice does benefit from long-standing precedent, meaning legal challenges against birthright citizenship could face an uphill battle. Nevertheless, many legal scholars argue that the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment does not mandate birthright citizenship for these children, as they are not subject to U.S. jurisdiction under the original understanding of the amendment.
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: The Senate is preparing to act on a White House request to rescind $9.4 billion in funding for foreign aid and government-funded broadcasting.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD), Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD), and President Donald J. Trump, among others.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The Senate could move forward as soon as Tuesday, with a Friday deadline looming for congressional action.
💬KEY QUOTE: “Very important that all Republicans adhere to my Recissions Bill,” said President Trump on Truth Social.
🎯IMPACT: The proposal could cut foreign aid, public broadcasting funding, and programs like PEPFAR.
IN FULL
The Senate is set to move forward on a White House request to claw back $9.4 billion in funding for international aid and public broadcasting. The rescissions package, requested in June, seeks to cancel previously approved funds, including $8.3 billion for USAID and $1.1 billion for public broadcasting entities like NPR and PBS. The White House has criticized these entities for spreading “radical, woke propaganda disguised as ‘news.'” The House of Representatives already approved the package last month, despite opposition from all Democrats and four Republicans.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) indicated that procedural votes could begin Tuesday afternoon, though some Republicans remain on the fence regarding specific cuts. Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) has voiced strong objections to targeting the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). The Maine Republican argues that cutting PEPFAR would harm global health efforts, including maternal and child health programs. “I can’t imagine why we would want to terminate that program,” she said.
Other concerns have been raised about the impact on rural communities. Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) highlighted the importance of public broadcasting for Native American tribes and rural areas, stating that Senate Republicans are working to ensure funding for these stations is preserved. “We’re proposing changes,” Rounds said, emphasizing the need to protect local radio systems in states like South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, and Alaska.
Conversely, President Donald J. Trump has urged Republicans to support the rescissions package, warning that those who do not back the proposal “will not have my support or Endorsement.” Meanwhile, Democrats, led by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), have criticized the effort as “absurd” and accused Republicans of undermining bipartisan deals for partisan purposes.
With the Friday deadline approaching, Senate Republicans face a narrow majority to pass the package. Amendments to the proposal could require further approval from the House, adding to the time constraints. Thune expressed hope for progress, stating, “I’m hoping that as we get on that bill we can see some savings achieved that will complement the things we already accomplished in reconciliation.”
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Reform Party leader Nigel Farage has reacted to news of a secret scheme to relocate thousands of Afghans to the United Kingdom, concealed from the public for years by a so-called superinjunction.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The British government, the Conservative (Tory) Party, the Labour Party, and Nigel Farage.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: Farage discussed the scandal on July 15. The secret relocation efforts have been ongoing since 2023.
💬KEY QUOTE: “The Afghan scandal has broken. Extraordinary that a British government put a superinjunction on all the British media that lasted over two years to cover up a story of incompetence, dishonesty, and a threat to our own national security.” – Nigel Farage
🎯IMPACT: The operation has taken the cost of importing Afghans to Britain to an estimated £7 billion (~$9.4 billion), with concerns over national security and public safety.
IN FULL
Nigel Farage has reacted to the massive scandal involving the British government secretly importing thousands of Afghans to the United Kingdom, hidden from the public until now by a so-called superinjunction that gagged the British press.
The plan, initiated in 2023, aimed to bring around 25,000 Afghans to Britain, as a result of the Ministry of Defence (MOD) accidentally leaking the details of people who had applied for relocation the previous year. Notably, many of these Afghans were unvetted, or had their applications rejected—but the government decided they should be imported anyway, due to the leak potentially putting them in danger. Among those relocated were migrants with criminal backgrounds, raising serious security concerns.
“The Afghan scandal has broken. Extraordinary that a British government put a superinjunction on all the British media that lasted over two years to cover up a story of incompetence, dishonest, and a threat to our own national security,” Farage said in a video statement published on X.
“An email missent published the names of 100,000 people in Afghanistan… Many of them had helped us during that 20-year war there; others were known to us for, frankly, just being bad people… Amongst the number that have come are convicted sex offenders—I am not, I promise you, making any of this up—and the total cost of the operation’s been a staggering £7 billion,” he continued.
“Of those that came, none of them were included in the immigration figures. There has been a total veil of secrecy put upon this by the last Conservative government, and, frankly, carried on until now by the current Labour government. The numbers are off the charts, the cost is beyond comprehension, and the threat to women walking the streets of this country, frankly, is incalculable,” he added.
Notably, Afghans have the highest sex offending rate per capita of any nationality in the United Kingdom, being over 22 times more likely to be convicted than British nationals.
The British government has long sought to keep the public in the dark about Afghan relocations, refusing, for instance, to disclose how many Afghans evacuated to Britain in the immediate aftermath of the Taliban takeover in Kabul were on watchlists, on the grounds that it might cause discrimination.
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.
