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

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

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

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

A MATTER OF LOYALTY. 

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

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

COHEN ADMITS HE LIED TO CONGRESS.

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

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

THE TIMELINE STILL MAKES NO SENSE.

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

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

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

NOTHING COHEN SAYS CAN BE BELIEVED. 

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

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

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

STORMY DANIEL’S DENIAL.

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

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

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

JUDGE MERCHAN’S INSTRUCTIONS. 

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

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

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

COHEN ‘STOPPED LYING IN 2018.’

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

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

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

CROSS-EXAMINATION BEGINS.

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

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

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

COHEN HAMMERED ON TIKTOK POSTS.

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

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

“I recall saying that,” Cohen responded.

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

A HAZY MEMORY. 

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

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

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

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

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

COHEN MAKES MONEY OFF TRUMP.

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

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

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

“Yes,” is all Cohen said in response.

OBSESSION.

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

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

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

“Yes, probably,” Cohen responded.

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

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

By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
More From The Pulse

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

ICE Detains HUNDREDS in Major NYC Crackdown.

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: ICE and federal law enforcement agencies conducted an immigration enforcement operation, leading to the arrest of over 200 individuals illegally present in the U.S.

👥 Who’s Involved: Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), various federal law enforcement partners, and individuals with criminal backgrounds.

📍 Where & When: New York City, Long Island, and the Lower Hudson Valley, between April 6-12.

💬 Key Quote: Eric Adams, NYC Mayor, stated, “One of the big mistakes that’s being made in some parts of the far-left philosophy is that ICE is a criminal organization. They are not, they are part of our law enforcement community.”

⚠️ Impact: The operation targeted individuals with serious criminal records, aiming to enhance public safety by removing offenders from communities.

IN FULL:

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), along with federal law enforcement partners, concluded a week-long operation in New York, resulting in the arrest of 206 individuals illegally residing in the U.S. The operation ran from April 6 to April 12 across New York City’s neighborhoods as well as Long Island and the Lower Hudson Valley.

The agency highlighted that many of those detained have significant criminal histories, associated with offenses such as manslaughter, rape, assault, and drug trafficking. Officials specifically targeted offenders considered dangerous, some affiliated with transnational gangs like MS-13, Tren de Aragua, Sureños, and the 18th Street gangs.

ICE stated that a substantial number of the arrests occurred after local New York authorities did not comply with immigration detainers by releasing suspects back into the community. Of those apprehended, 121 individuals had existing major criminal convictions or pending charges.

Among those arrested was Adnan Paulino-Flores, a 58-year-old Mexican individual with a history of sexual offenses. The operation also detained 51-year-old Jaime Gustavo Quizpi-Romero from Ecuador, who had been previously charged with assault and strangulation. Additionally, a member of the Tren de Aragua gang from Venezuela, 22-year-old Edimar Alejandra Colmenares Mendoza, was captured, facing charges related to conspiracy and possession of stolen property.

New York Mayor Eric Adams expressed support for the operation, emphasizing the need to remove criminals from public spaces. “One of the big mistakes that’s being made in some parts of the far-left philosophy is that ICE is a criminal organization. They are not; they are part of our law enforcement community,” he said, aiming to counter leftist claims about the agency.

Judith Almodovar, acting field office director for ICE in New York, praised the operation as a success in protective efforts alongside federal partners. Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons reiterated the significance of the operation, stating that New York’s safety is enhanced through the diligent work of enforcing immigration laws and public safety priorities.

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.

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.