GET THE APP
Friday, January 23, 2026

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

1 hour ago
News

Trump Teases ‘Fourth Term’ in Post-Davos Victory Lap.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: President Donald J. Trump hinted at a “fourth term” after his appearance at the World Economic Forum (WEF) summit in Davos, Switzerland.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Donald J. Trump, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, and European leaders.

📍WHEN & WHERE: January 22, 2026, on Trump’s Truth Social platform.

💬KEY QUOTE: “RECORD NUMBERS ALL OVER THE PLACE! SHOULD I TRY FOR A FOURTH TERM?” – Donald Trump

🎯IMPACT: Trump’s comments will spark discussions about potential constitutional amendments to continue his presidency.

IN FULL

President Donald J. Trump has teased the possibility of a “fourth term” following his appearance at the World Economic Forum (WEF) summit in Davos, Switzerland. During the summit, he underscored his determination to acquire Greenland from Denmark, and called out Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney for threatening “boots on the ice” in support of the territory. He also advised European leaders opposing the U.S. on Greenland, including Britain’s Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and France’s President Emmanuel Macron, to focus on their energy and mass migration crises rather than on U.S. foreign policy in the Western Hemisphere. Ultimately, NATO chief Mark Rutte announced that the “framework” of an agreement with the President on Greenland had been reached at the summit.

Writing on his Truth Social platform following Davos, Trump wrote, “RECORD NUMBERS ALL OVER THE PLACE! SHOULD I TRY FOR A FOURTH TERM?” This remark has generated significant attention and debate about his intentions.

As only the second American president in history to serve two non-consecutive terms, Trump often alluded to a third term. His mention of a fourth term likely references his belief that he was the rightful President during Joe Biden’s tenure, due to the 2020 election being rigged.

While Trump has dismissed the idea of running for vice presidency in 2028 as part of a novel attempt to bypass term limits, he has expressed enthusiasm for another term if it becomes permissible. MAGA stalwarts such as WarRoom host Stephen K. Bannon continue to advocate for Trump’s candidacy in 2028.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

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.
Pulse Ad
Pulse Ad
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.

12 minutes ago
Crime

Trump Admin’s Vought Turns Gaze on Federal Funding for Dem States.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) ordered federal agencies to compile reports on funding provided to Democrat-controlled states in what appears to be a broader federal effort to investigate widespread social services fraud.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The Trump White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB), OMB Director Russell Vought, federal agencies, and a number of Democrat-controlled states.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The memo was issued on January 20, with a deadline for agencies to submit data by January 28.

💬KEY QUOTE: “This is a data-gathering exercise only. It does not involve withholding funds, and therefore does not violate any court order.” – OMB memo

🎯IMPACT: The states slated for the data collection include California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington—along with Washington, D.C.

IN FULL

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB)—under the direction of the agency’s director, Russell Vought—has instructed nearly all federal agencies to compile detailed reports on federal funding directed to Democratic-led states. According to documents that surfaced on Thursday, the directive excludes the Pentagon and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

Notably, the January 20 memo emphasizes that this is a “data-gathering exercise only” and states that it “does not involve withholding funds, and therefore does not violate any court order.” While the memo does not outright state the intent of the data-gathering, it is likely tied to ongoing investigations into widespread allegations of social services fraud and the misuse of federal funds in Democrat-controlled states.

The states slated for the data collection include California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington state, along with Washington, D.C. The reports are expected to detail federal funding to states and localities, universities, and nonprofit organizations operating within these jurisdictions. Importantly, the funds in question are appropriated by Congress, and the deadline for agencies to submit the requested data is January 28.

Allegations of the criminal misuse and fraudulent disbursement of taxpayer dollars have continued to mount after numerous social services fraud schemes were exposed in Minnesota, most of which have been linked to the state’s large Somali immigrant community. Similar accusations have arisen in Maine and California as well.

The National Pulse reported earlier this month that U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent deployed his department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) to begin a geographic targeting operation for the Minneapolis-St. Paul area, applying extra scrutiny to all businesses engaging in overseas money transfers. In addition to the FinCEN geographic targeting order, Sec. Bessent announced that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) will soon launch a task force charged with investigating instances of COVID-19 pandemic relief fraud and violations of 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status by nonprofits tied to the numerous Somali community-linked social services fraud schemes.

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.

41 minutes ago
Media

Newsmax’s Chris Ruddy Slammed as ‘Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing’ for Opposing Nexstar-TEGNA Merger.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Sinclair Broadcast Group has urged the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to approve the merger between Nexstar Media Group and TEGNA, criticizing opposition to the deal—especially those opposed to reforms to ownership caps.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Sinclair Broadcast Group, Nexstar Media Group, TEGNA, National Religious Broadcasters, Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy, and the FCC.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The FCC filing was recently submitted as part of ongoing discussions regarding the merger.

💬KEY QUOTE: “We respectfully submit that many of the Petitioners are wolves in sheep’s clothing,” Sinclair stated in its filing.

🎯IMPACT: Critics of the ownership cap have consistently argued that the restrictions limit a competitive media marketplace and only serve to empower a handful of networks that wish to maintain the status quo of broadcast in America.

IN FULL

Sinclair Broadcast Group has filed comments with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) supporting the proposed merger between Nexstar Media Group and TEGNA. The company criticized opponents of the deal, such as Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy, arguing that the FCC has the legal authority to remove ownership cap limitations that have hindered the merger’s completion.

“We respectfully submit that many of the Petitioners are wolves in sheep’s clothing,” Sinclair stated in its filing, continuing, “They lecture the Commission about competition and the importance of local journalism despite their complete lack of involvement in promoting, preserving, or expanding local news.”

Sinclair, which competes with both Nexstar and TEGNA in 15 markets, emphasized that it supports the merger because it recognizes the broader competitive landscape. “The issues at stake are larger than any single broadcaster or transaction. If the Commission wants to preserve local news, it must modernize its regulations and its conception of the relevant market before it is too late,” the company added.

The comments come in response to opposition from groups such as the National Religious Broadcasters (NRB) and Newsmax, whose CEO Chris Ruddy has called the merger “unprecedented and dangerous consolidation within the broadcast TV industry.”

However, the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) has also weighed in, stating that opponents of the merger rely on “mischaracterized data and legal arguments that ignore today’s competitive landscape.” NAB further criticized Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy’s comments as “transparently insincere.”

Other critics of the caps argue that the ownership restrictions actually cause the very inverse of what Ruddy contends. The National Pulse’s Editor-in-Chief Raheem Kassam recently noted, “Ruddy keeps telling President Trump that easing television ownership caps, as I discussed with Daniel Suhr on my War Room Boxing Day special, is a bad idea.”

“It is. But only if you want to maintain the status quo of broadcast in America,” Kassam continued, adding that said status quo is, “Dominance by a handful of networks in the face of what should be a reasonably competitive marketplace.”

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.
Pulse Ad
Pulse Ad

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

2 hours ago
Immigration
News

Convicted Felon Democrat Moves to Ban ICE Agents From Police Jobs in Her State.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: A Democrat lawmaker introduced a bill to prohibit Washington state law enforcement from hiring people recruited as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents since January 2025.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: State Rep. Tarra Simmons, a felon and advocate for weaker criminal justice policies, introduced the bill.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The bill was introduced this week in Washington state and would take effect on October 1, 2026, if passed.

💬KEY QUOTE: “This shows the stunning hypocrisy of Democrats. Simmons is a convicted felon who has repeatedly pushed to force people to hire felons or offer them housing. Yet when it comes to law enforcement—hardworking Americans who don’t break the law—they should be shamed and discriminated against? It’s absolutely shameful.” – Radio host Jason Rantz.

🎯IMPACT: Critics argue the bill unfairly targets federal law enforcement, while Simmons defends it as a measure to maintain so-called community trust.

IN FULL

Washington state Rep. Tarra Simmons (D) introduced legislation this week that would prohibit state and local law enforcement agencies from hiring people who previously served as sworn officers with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The proposal, known as the ICE Out Act of 2026 or House Bill 2641, would apply to anyone recruited by ICE after President Donald J. Trump’s return to office in January 2025, and would take effect on October 1, 2026, if enacted.

Simmons, a Democrat and convicted felon who was re-elected in 2024, is a prominent advocate for criminal justice reform—i.e., weaker sanctions for criminals—and has publicly discussed her own past incarceration for drug, firearm, and theft offenses. Announcing the bill, Simmons claimed, “In this Washington, we have worked incredibly hard to build trust between law enforcement and community,” adding, “The last thing we need is infiltration of ICE agents trained during the Trump Administration to send us backwards.”

The press release accompanying the bill accused ICE agents of engaging in “inhumane and violent tactics,” including detaining individuals without cause, breaking into vehicles, accessing state data systems to locate people, and targeting not only illegal immigrants but also visa holders, green-card holders, and U.S. citizens.

Critics have strongly objected to the proposal. Local radio host Jason Rantz said, “This shows the stunning hypocrisy of Democrats. Simmons is a convicted felon who has repeatedly pushed to force people to hire felons or offer them housing. Yet when it comes to law enforcement—hardworking Americans who don’t break the law—they should be shamed and discriminated against? It’s absolutely shameful.”

The legislation comes amid broader Democrat attacks on ICE and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). In recent months, Democrat leaders in Congress have moved to block or restrict funding for ICE as part of negotiations over DHS appropriations, while pushing legislation aimed at eroding the privacy of ICE personnel, drawing warnings from the administration that such measures could expose thousands of agents to doxxing, harassment, and worse.

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.

3 hours ago
William Upton
Lawfare

Jack Smith Said He Expects to Be Indicted at Nightmare Hearing. Here’s What Happened:

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Former Biden government special counsel Jack Smith publicly testified before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday regarding his politically motivated investigations and prosecutions of President Donald J. Trump.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Former special counsel Jack Smith; Representatives Brandon Gill (R-TX), Darrell Issa (R-CA), and Tom Tiffany (R-WI); House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH), former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), and President Donald J. Trump.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The hearing was held on Capitol Hill on Thursday, January 22, 2026.

💬KEY QUOTE: ” Mr. Smith, at the time you secured those nondisclosure orders, was Speaker McCarthy a flight risk?” — Rep. Brandon Gill

🎯IMPACT: The hearing is being billed by House Republicans as an essential step in transparency—and possible criminal charges—surrounding Smith and the former Biden government’s Arctic Frost investigation

IN FULL

Former Biden government special counsel Jack Smith publicly testified before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday regarding his politically motivated investigations and prosecutions of President Donald J. Trump. Among the more explosive moments from the hearing were exchanges between Smith and Representatives Brandon Gill (R-TX) and Darrell Issa (R-CA) regarding the former special counsel’s methods in subpoenaing the phone toll records of former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA). In addition, Smith admitted he expects to be indicted by President Trump’s Department of Justice (DOJ).

The National Pulse reported last November that Smith, as part of the Biden government’s Arctic Frost probe targeting President Trump, requested the personal cellphone records of then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) and then-Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) during his probe into the January 6, 2021, Capitol protests. On May 25, 2023, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Criminal Investigative Division prepared a “Significant Case Notification” outlining Smith’s subpoena for toll records from AT&T and Verizon.

On Thursday, Rep. Darrell Issa revealed that the subpoena request submitted to a federal judge never actually named the individual for whom Smith was seeking the toll records. “Did you—whether you think it was legal or not, whether you think it was right or not—did you withhold the name of Kevin McCarthy, Speaker of the House, when you were seeking records on Kevin McCarthy, the Speaker of the House, or Jim Jordan, the Chairman of this committee?” Issa pressed, with Smith responding, “We did not provide that information to the judge when we requested a nondisclosure order, consistent with the law and consistent with department policy at the time.”


Moments later, Rep. Brandon Gill (R-TX) returned to Smith’s subpoena of McCarthy’s toll records and the nondisclosure order preventing AT&T and Verizon from notifying the former House Speaker that his records were to be given to the special counsel. “How many days after Kevin McCarthy was sworn in as Speaker did you subpoena his records?” Rep. Gill asked, with Smith stammering that he did not recall but insisting that the two events were unrelated. The Texas Congressman noted that the request was made just 16 days after McCarthy was handed the Speaker’s gavel.

Rep. Gill continued, pressing Smith on whether he had ever considered that the subpoena might violate the Speech and Debate Clause, to which the former special counsel never gave a firm answer. Notably, the Biden DOJ’s Public Integrity Unit raised concerns about the legality of actions taken during Arctic Frost, both before and after Smith assumed control of the investigation—including potential litigation over the toll record subpoenas.

Typically, the nondisclosure orders sought and secured by Smith are only issued in investigations where the subject is considered a flight risk, a point not lost on Rep. Gill. “Mr. Smith, at the time you secured those nondisclosure orders, was Speaker McCarthy a flight risk?” the Texas lawmaker asked, with a frazzled Smith attempting obfuscate but eventually acknowledging that the sitting Speaker of the House at the time was not a flight risk.


As the several-hour-long hearing progressed, Smith’s prosecutorial record—which Democrats on the Judiciary Committee repeatedly claimed was the “Gold Standard”—was exposed as anything but by Rep. Tom Tiffany (R-WI) in what was likely one of the most embarrassing moments for the former special counsel. “You prosecuted Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, you prosecuted him, correct?” Tiffany asked. Smith waffled, claiming he was only part of the prosecution, despite numerous public descriptions of him as the leading force behind the indictment and temporary conviction of the former governor. McDonnell’s conviction was ultimately overturned in a unanimous decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, with several justices excoriating Smith and his team for overcharging.

Rep. Tiffany went on to note Smith’s other high-profile prosecutions, including cases against former Senators John Edwards (D-NC) and Bob Menendez (D-NJ), both of which ended in mistrials. Smith acknowledged his role as the prosecutor in the Edwards case, but insisted that the mistrial against Menendez was not his fault since he had left the DOJ’s Public Integrity Unit and the prosecution before the mistrial was declared. Unrelated charges saw Menendez convicted of bribery and acting as an unregistered foreign agent, for which sentenced last year.


The hearing is being billed by House Republicans as an essential step in transparency—and possible criminal charges—surrounding Smith and the former Biden government’s Arctic Frost investigation. Whistleblower documents obtained by Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) show that Arctic Frost targeted not only President Trump but also over 430 individuals and organizations, including prominent conservative entities such as the late Charlie Kirk’s Turning Point USA (TPUSA) and the Republican Attorneys General Association (RAGA). Taken on its face, the probe appears to have been a sprawling conspiracy to interfere in the American election process and cripple the Republican Party’s ability to compete at the ballot box.

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.
Pulse Ad
Pulse Ad

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

4 hours ago
Christopher Tomlinson
Sports

World Cup Boycott Threats Swirl Over Greenland.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Several politicians in Europe have suggested their countries boycott the FIFA World Cup 2026 due to President Donald J. Trump’s Greenland policy.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: European politicians, Donald Trump, and FIFA.

📍WHEN & WHERE: Recent days, internationally.

💬KEY QUOTE: “I wonder whether we should call for a boycott of the 2026 World Cup… given Donald Trump’s behaviour towards the continent, with a FIFA president, Gianni Infantino, who prides himself on being at his side.” – Former French soccer manager Claude Le Roy.

🎯IMPACT: The calls do not seem to be gaining much traction, with France publicly stating it has no intention to boycott the event.

IN FULL

Several politicians in Europe have publicly raised the idea of a boycott of the FIFA World Cup 2026, which is being hosted by the United States, Canada, and Mexico, in response to escalating tensions over President Donald J. Trump’s push to acquire Greenland, a largely autonomous Danish territory.

In France, left-wing lawmaker Éric Coquerel said the question of a boycott should be examined if Trump’s policies continue to escalate. On social media, he wrote, “Seriously, can we really imagine going to play the World Cup in a country that attacks its neighbours, threatens to invade Greenland, undermines international law…”

French veteran coach Claude Le Roy went further, saying, “I wonder whether we should call for a boycott of the 2026 World Cup… given Donald Trump’s behaviour towards the continent, with a FIFA president, Gianni Infantino, who prides himself on being at his side.”

In Germany, a member of the ruling, notionally center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU), Jürgen Hardt, who serves as a foreign policy spokesman, described a boycott as something that could be considered. Speaking to German press, Hardt said a boycott might serve “as a last resort in order to get [President Donald] Trump to see sense on the Greenland issue.” He stressed that the German Football Federation would make the actual decision, however.

In Britain, some lawmakers have also mentioned the idea. Simon Hoarea, Member of Parliament (MP) for the formerly governing Conservative Party, suggested during a debate that a boycott could be a response to Trump’s Arctic policy, while Luke Taylor of the Liberal Democrats said such a move could signal that “the only thing [Trump] responds to is his own pride.”

Former Scottish National Party (SNP) MP Hannah Kennedy-Bardell drew controversy by urging that Scotland consider a boycott in protest, describing the idea of using sport as a tool against Trump as “radical action.” This would likely be highly unpopular in Scotland, which last qualified for a World Cup in 1998.

Some politicians seem more reluctant to pursue a boycott; however, France’s sports minister, Marina Ferrari, said her country has “no desire” to do so and stressed the importance of keeping sport separate from politics.

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.

5 hours ago
William Upton
NatSec
TECH

The TikTok Sale Deadline Is Today. Is It Happening?

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: The sale of the Chinese-owned social media app TikTok to a consortium of U.S.-led investors appears to still be in limbo as of January 22, 2026—the latest Trump administration-mandated deadline for the deal to close.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The Trump administration, ByteDance, TikTok, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), Chinese regulators, Oracle, Silver Lake, MGX, and other investors.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The deadline for the sale of TikTok to close is Thursday, January 22, 2026.

💬KEY QUOTE: “China’s position on TikTok has been consistent and clear. I have nothing new to share at the moment.” — Chinese Embassy spokesman

🎯IMPACT: With the deadline reached, it remains unclear whether the sale of TikTok has been approved by Chinese regulators, despite ByteDance clearing the sale and TikTok signing a binding agreement with investors.

IN FULL

Thursday marks the latest U.S. federally mandated deadline for TikTok—the popular video social media app owned by the Chinese company ByteDance—to be spun off and sold to a consortium of American investors led by Oracle and Silver Lake. While both the Trump administration and ByteDance executives have signed off on the Chinese company’s divestment from TikTok and the app’s sale, it remains unclear whether Chinese regulators in Beijing have given final clearance to the deal.

Still, a memo circulated by ByteDance executives last December indicated that the purchase of TikTok was set to close this week. U.S. President Donald J. Trump had previously extended the deadline for the purchase or ban of the app to January 22, 2026—though if the sale were to be approved several days after, it is unlikely to scuttle the agreement.

In December, TikTok’s CEO, Shou Chew, stated that the company had signed a binding agreement with its investors, though he acknowledged that Chinese regulators had yet to approve the purchase, noting, “there was more work to be done.” Under the purchase agreement, which forms a joint venture, ByteDance will still control just shy of 20 percent of TikTok, while the investor consortium led by Oracle, Silver Lake, and the United Arab Emirates’ MGX investment firm will each control 15 percent of the company’s shares.

Importantly, the deal creates a new and independent entity, “governed by a new seven-member majority-American board of directors,” that will oversee TikTok’s data, algorithms, and content moderation. However, it is still not known whether TikTok’s original content algorithm—which proved a significant sticking point during initial negotiations for both ByteDance and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)—is being relinquished to the U.S. investor consortium.

The Chinese Embassy in the United States was cryptic on the deal as of the January 22 deadline, with a spokesman stating, “China’s position on TikTok has been consistent and clear. I have nothing new to share at the moment.”

Image by greenwish.

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.
Pulse Ad
Pulse Ad

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

6 hours ago
Crime

Judge Rejects DOJ Charges Against Don Lemon for Church Invasion.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: A federal magistrate judge in Minnesota declined to sign a complaint charging disgraced journalist Don Lemon for his involvement in a protest inside a St. Paul church.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Don Lemon, Attorney General Pam Bondi, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem, and anti-ICE agitators Chauntyll Louisa Allen and Nekima Levy Armstrong.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota was invaded on Sunday.

💬KEY QUOTE: “Being a journalist is not a badge or a shield that protects you from criminal consequences.” — Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division Harmeet Dhillon

🎯IMPACT: The Justice Department may explore other avenues to charge Lemon, while two other anti-ICE activists face federal charges under civil rights laws.

IN FULL

Disgraced former CNN host Don Lemon appears to have escaped federal charges for the moment for his role in the storming of a Christian worship service at Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, by anti-ICE protestors last Sunday. On Thursday, a Minnesota federal magistrate judge refused to sign a criminal complaint charging Lemon, while still signing other charging documents against two of the protest’s organizers.

On Monday, the Department of Justice (DOJ) opened an investigation into the storming of Cities Church, in which anti-ICE extremists entered the sanctuary and halted the service for roughly 30 minutes, eventually causing worshipers to flee the building. Lemon accompanied the group, embedded with the protesters, and conducted hostile interviews during the disruption. Subsequent video clips suggest the ex-CNN anchor may have been more involved in the incident than he has publicly said.

Earlier on Thursday, Nekima Levy Armstrong—who runs the Black Lives Matter-affiliated Racial Justice Network (RJN)—was arrested and federally charged for her role in organizing the demonstration. Armstrong faces federal charges under 18 USC 241, a civil rights statute prohibiting conspiracies to interfere with constitutionally protected rights, such as religious freedom, according to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem.

In addition, Chauntyll Louisa Allen—a member of the St. Paul School board—was also arrested and charged. Attorney General Pam Bondi, who arrived in Minnesota earlier this week to oversee the mobilization of DOJ resources to address ongoing violent protests against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, announced the charges against both Armstrong and Allen.

Meanwhile, Lemon may still face federal charges despite the magistrate judge’s rejection of the DOJ filing. “Being a journalist is not a badge or a shield that protects you from criminal consequences,” Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division Harmeet Dhillon said in response to the decision.

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.

6 hours ago
William Upton
Crime

DOJ Arrests Radical Black Activist Behind Anti-ICE Church Invasion.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Federal authorities arrested an anti-ICE agitator after a mob stormed a church service in St. Paul, Minnesota.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Attorney General Pam Bondi, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents, and Nekima Levy Armstrong.

📍WHEN & WHERE: Announced Thursday, January 22, 2026, following the invasion of Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, during a service.

💬KEY QUOTE: “Listen loud and clear: WE DO NOT TOLERATE ATTACKS ON PLACES OF WORSHIP.” – Pam Bondi

🎯IMPACT: Federal action highlights a zero-tolerance stance on attacks against religious institutions by far-left activists.

IN FULL

The far-left organizer of an anti-ICE protest that stormed the Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, over the weekend has been arrested by federal law enforcement. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi announced on Thursday, January 22, that Nekima Levy Armstrong—a radical black activist who operates in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area and runs the Racial Justice Network (RJN)—has been taken into custody for organizing what is being characterized as an attack on the church.

“Minutes ago at my direction, HSI and FBI agents executed an arrest in Minnesota. So far, we have arrested Nekima Levy Armstrong, who allegedly played a key role in organizing the coordinated attack on Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota,” Attorney General Bondi wrote in a post on X (formerly Twitter) on Thursday morning. She added, “Listen loud and clear: WE DO NOT TOLERATE ATTACKS ON PLACES OF WORSHIP.”

The National Pulse reported on Monday that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) had opened an investigation into the violent protest, which halted a Christian worship service at Cities Church for around 30 minutes as anti-ICE agitators screamed at and intimidated parishioners. Disgraced former CNN host Don Lemon accompanied the group, embedded with the protesters, and conducted interviews during the disruption. Congregants were forced to flee as the unrest unfolded inside the church.

Following the storming of Cities Church, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz (D) tried to distance himself from the incident and ongoing violent anti-ICE demonstrations in Minneapolis and St. Paul. Late Monday, Walz’s office claimed he has “repeatedly” urged residents to protest “peacefully,” despite prior anti-ICE provocations by the governor. “The Governor has repeatedly and unequivocally urged protesters to do so peacefully. While people have a right to speak out, he in no way supports interrupting a place of worship,” his office claimed.

Image by Lorie Shaull.

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.
Pulse Ad
Pulse Ad

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

7 hours ago
William Upton
Immigration

American Transgender ‘Refugees’ Put in Camp With Migrants.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: The Netherlands is placing American transgenders who are claiming refugee status because of President Donald J. Trump in the country’s infamous Ter Apel refugee camp.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: American transgenders, the Netherlands, Dutch immigration officials, the Ter Apel refugee camp, and U.S. President Donald J. Trump.

📍WHEN & WHERE: Several American transgenders have sought refugee status in the Netherlands since President Trump’s inauguration last year.

💬KEY QUOTE: “My dream is to go to America or the UK. America for me is the paradise. You can work, you can make a million if you have a good idea. Why they come here?” — 21-year-old North African refugee

🎯IMPACT: It is expected that every American transgender claiming refugee status will be denied asylum and deported back to the United States.

IN FULL

The Netherlands is placing American transgenders who are claiming refugee status because of President Donald J. Trump in the country’s infamous Ter Apel refugee camp. While Dutch officials describe the facility as a “permanent reception center,” the facility appears more like a prison—with extensive fencing surrounding the encampment and a heavy guard presence.

Notably, the presence of the American asylum seekers isn’t sitting well with the nearly 2,000 other migrants from around the world housed at Ter Apel. “My dream is to go to America or the UK. America for me is the paradise,” a 21-year-old North African woman living at the camp said in a recent interview. “You can work, you can make a million if you have a good idea. Why they come here?”

Still, several dozen Americans have left the United States since President Trump’s inauguration over a year ago and sought asylum in the Netherlands. Jane-Michelle Arc, a transgender from San Francisco, flew to the Netherlands last April and promptly asked a Dutch customs agent how to seek refugee status. “And they laughed because: what’s this big dumb American doing here asking about asylum? And then they realized I was serious,” Arc said.

The claims being made by the so-called American refugees are bizarre. In Arc’s case, he asserts that President Trump’s United States had become so terrifying and dangerous that he would no longer leave his San Francisco home “unless there was an Uber waiting outside.” However, he would likely face more danger from unchecked crime in the greater Bay Area than the President.

Transgender and LGBTQ refugees are kept in separate housing from the camp’s general population—which includes asylum seekers from places like Syria, Libya, Sudan, and other countries. It is expected that every American claiming refugee status will be denied asylum and deported back to the United States. Over the last several years, only around a couple of dozen U.S. passport holders have received asylum in the Netherlands—all children and all dependents on parents who are of Yemeni, Syrian, or Turkish origin.

Image via FCDO.

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.

8 hours ago
Christopher Tomlinson
Media
Politics

Trump FCC Clamps Down on Late-Night and Daytime TV Bias.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Federal Communications Commission (FCC) head Brendan Carr has demanded that late-night and daytime TV hosts give equal time to political candidates after accusations of anti-Republican and anti-Trump bias.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: FCC Chair Brendan Carr, Jimmy Kimmel, Steven Colbert, Donald J. Trump, late-night and daytime TV hosts.

📍WHEN & WHERE: Carr announced the move on X on Wednesday, January 21.

💬KEY QUOTE: “For years, legacy TV networks assumed that their late night & daytime talk shows qualify as ‘bona fide news’ programs — even when motivated by purely partisan political purposes.” – Brendan Carr.

🎯IMPACT: Broadcasters could now face penalties for not giving equal airtime to all sides of political debates.

IN FULL

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) chief Brendan Carr issued new regulatory guidance on January 21, warning broadcasters that late-night and daytime talk shows must comply with federal equal time rules when featuring political candidates in a move to combat the clear leftist bias among many TV hosts. The guidance directs broadcast stations to ensure that political candidates are given equal opportunities on programs such as morning shows and late-night comedy, pushing back on what Carr described as a long-standing assumption that such shows automatically qualify as “bona fide news” programming.

Carr argued that this exemption has been stretched to cover content driven by partisan intent. “For years, legacy TV networks assumed that their late night & daytime talk shows qualify as ‘bona fide news’ programs — even when motivated by purely partisan political purposes,” Carr wrote in a post on X. “Today, the FCC reminded them of their obligation to provide all candidates with equal opportunities.”

Carr has previously cited ABC’s daytime program The View as an example of a show that could face scrutiny, and his comments follow earlier criticism of Jimmy Kimmel Live! On the eve of the 2024 election, Carr also accused Saturday Night Live of skirting equal time requirements when it featured then-Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris, leading NBC to provide President Donald J. Trump airtime during NASCAR and NFL broadcasts.

Conservative attorney Daniel Suhr, who heads the Center for American Rights and has supported Carr’s agenda, praised the move and said it could apply broadly to late-night television. “Daytime TV like [The View] and late night shows like [Jimmy Kimmel Live!] & [The Late Show With Stephen Colbert] have consistently featured only Democratic candidates while shutting out Republicans,” Suhr wrote on X. “This [FCC] notice is an important step toward accountability for these legacy network shows.”

The guidance arrives amid heightened controversy surrounding late-night hosts. In recent years, Stephen Colbert and Jimmy Kimmel have repeatedly clashed with Trump, with Colbert once telling the President to “go f**k yourself.” Kimmel has also faced mounting scrutiny, including a temporary suspension by ABC following backlash over comments about the murder of Charlie Kirk, implying conservatives were responsible for it.

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.
Pulse Ad
Pulse Ad