Saturday, April 19, 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 8: Judge Could Jail Ex-Prez for OLD Posts, as Prosecution Reels From Hope Hicks’s Demolition of Michael Cohen.

Former Trump campaign aide Hope Hicks had some choice things to say about Michael Cohen last week, which bear consideration. During defense attorney Emil Bove’s cross-examination, Hicks took aim at Cohen’s credibility. She told Bove that the disgraced attorney “used to like to call himself Mr. Fix It, but it was only because he first broke it.”

When Bove, who is one of former President Donald J. Trump‘s attorneys in the hush money trial, asked Hicks about Cohen’s role in the 2016 campaign, she threw additional cold water on the prosecution’s assertions. “No, he would try to insert himself at certain moments, but he wasn’t supposed to be on the campaign in any official capacity,” Hicks responded. She added: “There were things he did in a voluntary capacity because of his interest.”

Asked if Cohen was prone to going rogue, Hicks said, “Yes.”

MERCHAN HOLDS TRUMP IN CONTEMPT… AGAIN. 

Day eight of former President Donald Trump‘s Manhattan-based hush money trial ended about 30 minutes earlier than scheduled. Judge Juan Merchan gave no reason for the court’s adjournment.

The court’s morning session began with another hearing on alleged violations of the gag order placed on former President Trump by Democrat-aligned Judge Merchan. Once again, the former President was found in contempt of the order and fined $1,000 for the new violation. “I find you in criminal contempt for the 10th time,” the judge said. He added: “Going forward, this court will have to consider a jail sanction.”

“Mr. Trump, it’s important you understand that the last thing I want to do is put you in jail. You are the former president of the United States and possibly the next president as well,” Judge Merchan continued. He added, “The magnitude of this decision is not lost on me, but at the end of the day, I have a job to do.”

But even Democrat legal strategists admitted Merchan’s behavior didn’t stack up, with the judge seemingly rebuking Trump for statements that have been long-deleted.

THE ACCOUNTANT ON THE STAND. 

Following the testimony of Hope Hicks, the prosecution next brought Jeff McConney, the former controller — essentially the top accountant — for the Trump Organization. McConney has testified twice before in legal proceedings involving Donald Trump —before Judge Juan Merchan in the 2022 Trump Organization tax fraud trial and in last fall’s civil fraud trial against Trump brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James.

Former Biden Justice Department attorney Matthew Colangelo handled the questioning for the prosecution.

The early part of McConney’s testimony was focused on establishing his role and chain of command within the Trump Organization. The former controller told Colangelo that he oversaw the company’s accounting department and Deb Tarasoff, the accounts payable supervisor. Tarasoff would be the next prosecution witness brought before the court adjourned for the day.

WHO CUTS THE CHECKS?

Early on, the prosecution focused on check signing authority. According to McConney, prior to 2017 — when Trump was inaugurated as President — Donald Trump had the signing authority. Once he became President, however, a trust account was formed with Donald Trump, Jr., Eric Trump, and Allen Weisselberg having signing authority.

Much of the morning focused on Colangelo and McConney walking through accounting practices, tax applicability to employee reimbursements, and the general ledger for Donald Trump’s personal account. While this was not the most riveting testimony, much of the prosecution‘s case hinges on the contention that the former President directed Michael Cohen‘s actions and understood the nature of the payments made to Cohen from the personal account.

COLANGELO BORES THE COURT. 

As the trial neared lunchtime, Colangelo finally began to focus on Michael Cohen — though McConney’s testimony was less than helpful to the prosecution’s case. When asked if he knew Cohen, McConney responded: “He said he was a lawyer.”

The prosecutor followed up, asking, “Did he work in the legal department?” McConney drew audible laughs from the courtroom with his response. “I guess so,” he said.

Next, Colangelo probed McConney on checks cut to Cohen, with the former controller saying that Allen Weisselberg had told him that they needed to get some money to the disgraced lawyer. “We added everything up, and came up with the amount we would have to pay him,” McConney said.

He testified that $35,000 was to be wired to Cohen monthly from Donald Trump‘s account. After reviewing Cohen’s invoices and the payment process for over an hour, McConney testified that he could not recall any further payments after December 2017. The prosecution ended its questioning after entering into evidence the invoices and financial disclosures relating to the payments to Cohen that allegedly covered the money he sent to Keith Davidson.

COHEN ACTED AS A VENDOR.

Emil Bove again handled the cross-examination for Trump‘s defense team. He kicked off the cross, asking McConney how often he spoke with Trump. The former Trump Organization controller said it wasn’t often. The defense attorney moved on to Cohen‘s employment status, asking McConney if Cohen used a Trump Organization account. McConney responded that Cohen did not and instead used a personal Gmail account. McConney explained that this meant Cohen was acting, essentially, as an outside vendor and not a Trump employee.

When Bove asked if McConney knew the nature of Cohen’s legal work or if the disgraced attorney was doing any personal work for Trump in 2017, McConney said: “I do not know.” Following up, when asked about his conversation with Weisselberg, McConney testified that he didn’t know what Cohen was seeking reimbursement for.

TRUMP DIDN’T ORDER PAYMENTS.

Moving on, Bove began chipping away at the core of the prosecution‘s case. Bragg’s team has spent a great deal of time insinuating that the payments made to Cohen were somehow illegal. Bove asked McConney, “These payments were also disclosed to the IRS, correct?” The former controller responded, “Yes.”

Bove, presenting McConney with an IRS 1099 form, asked: “There’s no place on this form to break out payments for legal services versus expenses incurred right?” McConney again responded, “Yes.”

Shifting to Cohen, the defense attorney asked McConney, “And it’s Michael Cohen’s job to figure out how to account for these payments on his personal taxes correct?” McConney once again responded, “Yes.” When asked if he knew whether Cohen had included the payments in his tax filings, McConney replied that he did not know.

In the most important moment, Bove asked McConney: “President Trump did not ask you to do any of the things you described?”

“He did not,” the former controller replied.

STILL NO EVIDENCE. 

A brief redirect by Colangelo may have further undermined the prosecution. McConney testified that he merely did as directed by Weisselberg. However, the former controller also said he was never privy to, nor knew of, any conversations between Weisselberg and Trump regarding payments to Cohen.

Despite the prosecution continuing to insinuate that Trump knew the nature of and directed the payments to Cohen, not a single witness that it has brought has been able to establish this assertion. In fact, several of the witnesses, so far, have actually undermined the claim — adding to the Trump defense team’s argument that he thought the payments were, in fact, for legal services and was unaware of Cohen’s agreement with Keith Davidson.

The next witness brought by the prosecution was Deb Tarasoff. Again, despite the prosecution’s efforts, Tarasoff said that Weisselberg was the man who called most of the shots and had the most contact with Cohen. The remainder of her testimony was a rehash of the invoice and check signing process heard in McConney’s morning testimony. After the prosecution finished and the defense engaged in a brief cross-examination, the court adjourned.

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

Editor’s Notes

Behind-the-scenes political intrigue exclusively for Pulse+ subscribers.

RAHEEM J. KASSAM Editor-in-Chief
I know it’s a lot to read, but these round-ups by Will Upton are well worth it
I know it’s a lot to read, but these round-ups by Will Upton are well worth it show more
for exclusive members-only insights
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.

A Federal Labor Arbitrator Says IRS Employees Can Continue Working from Home Four Days a Week.

PULSE POINTS:

What Happened: The government union representing  IRS employees successfully defended a telework policy allowing employees to work remotely up to eight days per biweekly pay period. A federal labor arbitrator dismissed the Trump White House and IRS officials’ concerns regarding performance and service to taxpayers under this arrangement.

👥 Who’s Involved: The IRS, the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU), an arbitrator, Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA), and President Donald Trump.

📍 Where & When: The agreement was finalized last October, with ongoing arbitration over several policies.

💬 Key Quote: Sen. Ernst critiqued, “While the American people are working hard, the tax collectors are trying to hardly work.”

⚠️ Impact: The ruling allows for substantial remote work at the IRS, leading to criticism regarding taxpayer-funded unions and concerns over IRS employee performance. There is ongoing tension over telework policies in federal agencies.

IN FULL:

Prior to President Donald J. Trump’s second term in office, employees at the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) secured a lucrative policy allowing them to work remotely all but one day a week through an agreement between the agency and the National Treasury Employees Union. The policy received significant pushback from IRS senior leadership, who contend that excessive teleworking could hinder the agency’s ability to serve taxpayers effectively.

Consequently, the Trump White House and the IRS have attempted to roll back the telework agreement and cap telework to just six days per pay period—a modest change that would essentially require workers to be in the office twice a week. However, a federal labor arbitrator has intervened and rejected the telework changes. “To hold telework solely responsible for such issues is inappropriate. Given the need for supervisors to assess the portability of an individual employee’s work, I am not convinced there should be an arbitrary six-day cap,” the arbitrator said regarding their decision to reject the six-day telework policy.

Notably, the National Treasury Employees Union, representing career IRS and Treasury Department employees, uses taxpayer dollars to fund labor negotiations and arbitration cases with the federal government. The most recent available public data shows that around $160 million in taxpayer dollars were spent on government union activities in 2019.

While efforts to rein in the tax collection agency’s absurdly lax telework policy have thus far proven unsuccessful, the arbitrator did agree with the Trump White House that the IRS’s employee bonus structure was too generous. Instead, the arbitrator determines that employee bonuses will be more limited in size and scope, with individual units under the agency determining the qualifying standards.

In a recent media interview, Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA)—who chairs the Senate DOGE Caucus—blasted the telework policy and taxpayer funding of government union collective bargaining negotiations. “While the American people are working hard, the tax collectors are trying to hardly work,” the Iowa Senator said, adding: “It is infuriating that our tax dollars are footing the bill for union bosses to negotiate for IRS bureaucrats to get cushy telework agreements and bloated bonus structures.”

Image by Alpha Photo.

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.

Chris Cuomo Cautions James Carville Against Defending Alleged MS-13 Member.

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: NewsNation host Chris Cuomo discussed with Democratic strategist James Carville the political consequences of advocating for the return of deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an alleged MS-13 gang member, whose deportation order sparked controversy.

👥 Who’s Involved: Chris Cuomo, James Carville, Democratic Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, and the Department of Justice (DOJ).

📍 Where & When: The discussion took place on the “CUOMO” show on Wednesday. The events are linked to Garcia’s deportation to El Salvador.

💬 Key Quote: Chris Cuomo commented, “… it does look, with Van Hollen running down to El Salvador, like you guys are pleading the case of a gang banger and trying to bring him back into this country.”

⚠️ Impact: The situation highlights tensions around deportation policies and Democratic strategies.

IN FULL:

NewsNation host Chris Cuomo engaged Democratic strategist James Carville in a debate over the political challenges surrounding the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a man deported due to alleged ties with the notorious MS-13 gang. This conversation took place on Wednesday on Cuomo’s show, drawing attention to broader contentious immigration policy issues.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) revealed earlier that day Garcia’s alleged association with the gang, spotlighting a fierce political struggle as Democratic Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen continues efforts to have Garcia returned to the United States from El Salvador. Van Hollen has reportedly faced hurdles in his attempts to meet Garcia and local officials in El Salvador.

Cuomo, addressing potential political fallout, suggested that Van Hollen’s actions might project an image of the Democrats siding with a figure perceived as a criminal by the public. “Politically, if you want to argue due process, that’s high ground. But it does look… like you guys are pleading the case of a gang banger,” Cuomo stated. Carville, however, firmly believes in the judicial imperative to return Garcia to the U.S., citing an obligation to uphold constitutional rights and judicial decisions.

Records show Garcia entered the United States illegally in 2011, leading to his detainment and subsequent deportation. Controversy grew as Carville claimed that Garcia was innocent, despite the Department of Homeland Security court filings that also mention a request for a domestic violence restraining order against him.

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.

Musk’s SpaceX is Favored for ‘Golden Dome’ Contract – REPORT.

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: SpaceX proposed launching 400 to over 1,000 satellites to track missiles as part of a potential “Golden Dome” missile defense system.

👥 Who’s Involved: SpaceX, President Donald Trump, Palantir, Anduril, and Elon Musk.

📍 Where & When: News reported on April 18, 2025, related to U.S. missile defense initiatives.

💬 Key Quote: Elon Musk stated on X that SpaceX has not attempted to bid for any contract, and he mentioned, “If the President asks us, we will do so, but I hope that other companies can do this.”

⚠️ Impact: The potential project could involve a multi-billion-dollar investment and require government funding for continued use.

IN FULL:

SpaceX has expressed interest in contributing to a proposed missile defense system in the United States that could involve launching hundreds of satellites. Reports indicate that SpaceX, alongside Palantir and Anduril, is participating in efforts to develop a missile defense network similar to Israel’s Iron Dome. The project, referred to as the “Golden Dome,” aims to sense and intercept incoming missiles.

The proposal includes deploying between 400 and over 1,000 satellites for missile tracking. Additionally, a separate fleet of approximately 200 satellites equipped with either missiles or lasers has been suggested for destroying threats. This plan aligns with an executive order signed by President Donald J. Trump earlier in the year.

SpaceX’s role is expected to center on providing satellite infrastructure rather than weaponizing satellites. The projected expenditure for SpaceX’s portion ranges from $6 billion to $10 billion. Funding the initiative might involve a subscription-based model in which the government would pay for continuous satellite use.

Elon Musk has clarified SpaceX’s current position, stating the company has not placed bids for any contracts related to this system. Musk emphasized that SpaceX would participate if requested by national authorities, but he urged other entities to take up the endeavor.

If realized, the initiative would require significant investment and time to materialize. Analysts and observers suggest years of development could be needed to fully implement such a system and ensure its effectiveness in missile interception.

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.

Rubio Signals He May Have Failed in Russia-Ukraine Ceasefire Talks.

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that the US might halt efforts for a comprehensive ceasefire in Ukraine if there’s no significant progress soon.

👥 Who’s Involved: Secretary of State Marco Rubio, President Donald Trump, President Volodymyr Zelensky, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal.

📍 Where & When: Statements were made in Paris on Friday during diplomatic talks; ceasefire determination timeline is described as “a matter of days.”

💬 Key Quote: “We need to determine very quickly now, and I’m talking about a matter of days, whether or not this is doable,” Rubio said.

⚠️ Impact: Failure to reach a ceasefire may lead the US to refocus its efforts; meanwhile, a US-Ukraine mineral deal is pending finalization.

IN FULL:

Secretary of State Marco Rubio signaled this week that his State Department is failing to secure any resolution to the Ukraine-Russia conflict as the administration nears its 100th day in office.

As a result, the United States may abandon its attempts to secure a comprehensive ceasefire in Ukraine if no substantial progress is seen within a matter of days, Rubio announced Friday. Speaking in Paris after diplomatic discussions, Rubio emphasized the urgency of assessing the feasibility of ending the conflict soon. Without sufficient headway, he indicated that the US government could discontinue peace efforts.

The conflict in Ukraine, which dates back over a decade to the U.S and EU-backed overthrow of an elected leader in the once buffer nation, has seen limited resolution, despite various diplomatic engagements and talks with both Russian and Ukrainian leaders. President Donald Trump has shown a desire to conclude the hostilities promptly, though efforts have so far been marked by minimal concessions from either side.

Rubio has engaged with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov multiple times to facilitate a truce, labeling a recent phone exchange as “constructive.” However, a 30-day moratorium intended to reduce attacks on energy facilities lapsed without significant effect, with both countries exchanging accusations of violations.

While a ceasefire appears elusive, the US and Ukraine are progressing towards a resource agreement anticipated by April 26. A memorandum, whose details emerged on Friday, hints at US access to Ukrainian rare earth minerals essential for advanced technology. This prospective deal aims to bolster US-Ukraine relations and ensure enduring support.

Discussions continue, and Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal is scheduled to meet US Treasury officials in Washington. This meeting aims to finalize the arrangement, which proponents believe could aid Ukraine’s reconstruction financing efforts. The memorandum underlines existing US aid to Ukraine, addressing potential repayment through crucial mineral resources.

Simultaneously, hostilities persist, with Russian strikes hitting several areas in Ukraine, reportedly causing mass casualties and damage.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

show more

Editor’s Notes

Behind-the-scenes political intrigue exclusively for Pulse+ subscribers.

RAHEEM J. KASSAM Editor-in-Chief
My alternative headline on this piece was, “SHOCK: Warmonger fails to end war
My alternative headline on this piece was, “SHOCK: Warmonger fails to end war show more
for exclusive members-only insights
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 Imposes New Port Fees on Chinese Vessels.

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: The Trump administration announced plans to impose new fees at U.S. ports on Chinese-made vessels as part of its trade strategy with China.

👥 Who’s Involved: The U.S. government, through the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), has taken these measures, primarily affecting Chinese shipping companies.

📍 Where & When: The announcement was made on Thursday evening. These changes will influence port operations across the United States.

💬 Key Quote: Captain John Konrad, founder and CEO of gCaptain, expressed concern: “Nothing in my 18 years since founding Captain has caused more panic than [the USTR’s] recent proposal…”

⚠️ Impact: The decision may influence U.S.-China trade relations and U.S. port operations. The trade community has raised concerns over the immediate effects and structural capacity in the shipping industry.

IN FULL:

The Trump administration has continued its pursuit against Communist China by implementing new port fees on vessels built in the hostile nation. These fees are part of a broader strategy to present a firmer stance in line with Trump’s campaign pledges on trade. Despite halting a broader reciprocal tariff plan, Trump has intensified specific levies on China due to intense retaliatory moves from Beijing. In reaction to this, the U.S. is currently considering a 245 percent duty on imports from China.

Chinese authorities have dismissed the U.S. threats as inconsequential. Following a detailed inquiry lasting nine months, the USTR announced plans for additional charges on Chinese-made ships, referring to undiscriminating fees that will also cover certain maritime service activities. It was found that China’s policies have compromised U.S. business engagements within the maritime industry and posed risks to economic security by increasing dependency on Chinese imports.

This policy adjustment follows a troublesome period during the Biden administration when supply chains heavily reliant on China faced severe disruption. This led numerous countries to seek reduced dependence on Chinese freight services. As a result, the U.S. adapted by increasing imports from countries like Mexico and Canada.

However, several industry figures raised alarms owing to the comprehensive application of these fees. The USTR responded by instituting phased implementation, initially setting the fee at zero dollars for 180 days, increasing gradually each year. There are exemptions for certain U.S. Maritime Administration programs, vessels arriving empty, and others based on specific criteria, aiming to mitigate undue economic strain on U.S. businesses.

Fees will be assessed based on cargo weight, not the number of ports visited, with calculations occurring up to five times annually. Exemptions include operations in the Great Lakes, the Caribbean, and U.S. territories.

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.

EU Prez Von der Leyen Hits Out at Trump’s Inner Circle.

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen addressed the state of transatlantic relations, criticizing the unpredictability of the US administration under President Donald Trump and likening key figures to oligarchs.

👥 Who’s Involved: Ursula von der Leyen, Donald Trump, Italian PM Giorgia Meloni, US Vice-President JD Vance.

📍 Where & When: Comments were published in German newspaper Die Zeit, ongoing developments with trade talks involving the EU and US.

💬 Key Quote: “We don’t have bros or oligarchs making the rules.”

⚠️ Impact: The statement reflects tensions in US-EU relations, with discussions ongoing about tariffs and trade agreements. Trump has recently been noted for easing tariffs on European imports.

IN FULL:

In a candid evaluation of European and American relations, Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, voiced concerns about the current dynamics, noting that traditional alliances are shifting. In an interview with Die Zeit, she criticized the US administration’s approach and compared influential figures to Russian oligarchs. This marks a significant moment in transatlantic discussions as von der Leyen emphasized Europe’s commitment to global trade principles, contrasting it with tactics she attributes to Washington.

Her comments come at a time when trade agreements between the US and EU are a point of contention. Trump recently retracted tariffs impacting European imports valued at £328 billion, a move following financial market instability. Nonetheless, Vice-President JD Vance has been critical of the EU, labeling it as undemocratic and suppressive towards right-wing populism.

“We don’t have bros or oligarchs making the rules,” von der Leyen said, adding, “[t]he West as we knew it no longer exists.”

Despite these challenges, von der Leyen claims Europe as a model of stability and predictability, stressing the region’s position in global economics. She highlighted that only a small portion of Europe’s trade is with the US, causing concern that as with prior decades, the European Union is inclined to move further towards the Chinese Communist Party and its brutal regime.

“In Europe, children can go to good schools however wealthy their parents are. We have lower CO2 emissions and higher life expectancy,’ she said, adding that “controversial debates are allowed at our universities,” in a clear dig at Trump’s policy of removing anti-American and anti-Israel students from college campuses.

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.

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.