Donald Trump Jr. is pushing back against Nikki Haley following her criticism of President-elect Donald J. Trump’s selection of Tulsi Gabbard for Director of National Intelligence and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). Haley, a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, expressed disapproval of Gabbard on her SiriusXM show, alleging she is a sympathizer of Russia, Iran, Syria, and China. She went on to call Kennedy Jr. a “liberal Democrat.”
Haley accused Gabbard of sharing Russian propaganda, criticizing sanctions against Iran, and doubting Syria’s use of chemical weapons. This comes despite Gabbard’s long tenure in the U.S. military, where she achieved the rank of Lieutenant Colonel and still likely holds a high-level security clearance.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
In response to Haley’s comments, Trump Jr. posted on X (formerly Twitter) sarcastically suggesting Haley should run for president if she desires a cabinet of “neocon warmongers.” He noted that Haley had already attempted to run and lost heavily in the GOP primary against Trump, later endorsing him in the presidential race against Kamala Harris.
If Nikki Haley really wants a cabinet filled with neocon warmongers to satisfy the billionaire donors that control her, she should try running for President and winning herself…Oh wait, I forgot she already tried that and lost in a landslide 🤣🤣🤣🤣 https://t.co/u0fxZwBfx8
Haley argued against Gabbard by recalling a past speech where she “[held] up pictures of dead children who had been killed by chemical attacks” in Douma, Syria, criticizing Gabbard for suggesting the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad had not launched the attack,
“For her to say that Assad was not behind that—literally everything she said about that were Russian talking points. Every bit of that was Russian propaganda,” Haley insisted.
She complained Gabbard had blamed NATO for the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
❓What Happened: A federal judge ruled that the Trump administration cannot use the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) to detain or deport a group of Venezuelan illegal immigrants from a Texas facility.
👥 Who’s Involved: U.S. District Court Judge Fernando Rodriguez, the Trump administration, Venezuelan illegal immigrants alleged to be part of the Tren de Aragua (TdA) gang.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍 Where & When: Southern Texas, with the ruling issued on Thursday, May 1.
💬 Key Quote: Judge Rodriguez claims the president’s invocation of the AEA through proclamation “exceeds the scope of the statute and is contrary to the plain, ordinary meaning of the statute’s terms.”
⚠️ Impact: The administration is barred from using the AEA and Trump’s proclamation to detain or remove the migrants, but removal proceedings can still proceed under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
IN FULL:
A federal judge has ruled that President Donald J. Trump‘s March 15 proclamation invoking the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) to expedite the deportation of illegal immigrants residing in the United States exceeds the statutory authority laid out in the law. U.S. District Court Judge Fernando Rodriguez—appointed to the bench in 2018 during Trump’s first term in office—issued the decision on Thursday, determining that the America First leader cannot use the AEA as a legal justification for holding or deporting illegal immigrants either residing or detained in the jurisdiction of the Southern District of Texas.
“The Proclamation makes no reference to and in no manner suggests that a threat exists of an organized, armed group of individuals entering the United States at the direction of Venezuela to conquer the country or assume control over a portion of the nation,” Rodriguez wrote in his ruling. He continued: “Thus, the Proclamation’s language cannot be read as describing conduct that falls within the meaning of ‘invasion’ for purposes of the AEA.”
“Neither the Court nor the parties question that the Executive Branch can direct the detention and removal of aliens who engage in criminal activity in the United States… The question that this lawsuit presents is whether the president can utilize a specific statute, the AEA, to detain and remove Venezuelan aliens who are members of TdA,” the judge continued, concluding: “As to that question, the historical record renders clear that the president’s invocation of the AEA through the proclamation exceeds the scope of the statute and is contrary to the plain, ordinary meaning of the statute’s terms.”
Notably, Tren de Aragua has been officially designated as a foreign terrorist organization, and the FBI reportedly has evidence that the Venezuelan government is aiding its infiltration of the U.S.
The lawsuit, initially filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and the subsequent ruling come as a blow to the Trump White House’s push to swiftly deport dangerous, criminal illegal immigrants. Should the administration appeal Judge Rodriguez’s decision, the conservative-dominated 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in New Orleans, would hear the case. However, the 5th Circuit has shown a penchant in the past to rule against actions it sees as constitutional overreach by the Executive Branch, especially on the issue of immigration. Previously, the appellate court ruled against measures enacted by former Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama aimed at allowing illegal immigrants to remain in the country.
Notably, Judge Rodriguez took over the case from James Boasberg, who serves as the chief judge for the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The change in venue and judge occurred after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that legal challenges to President Trump’s deportations can only be filed in the court district where the deported person resides or is detained. In addition, the Supreme Court determined that lower court rulings on the matter only apply to the judge’s respective judicial district.
While still presiding over the case earlier this year, Judge Boasberg issued a temporary halt to the deportation of illegal Venezuelan immigrants under the AEA in a bizarre order that demanded the Trump administration recall two planes that were over international waters carrying deportees to El Salvador.
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.
❓What Happened: President Donald J. Trump announced that National Security Advisor Mike Waltz will be nominated as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio taking over as National Security Advisor temporarily.
👥 Who’s Involved: President Trump, Mike Waltz, Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍 Where & When: Announced on Truth Social on May 1, 2025.
💬 Key Quote: “From his time in uniform on the battlefield, in Congress and, as my National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz has worked hard to put our Nation’s Interests first. I know he will do the same in his new role,” Trump stated.
⚠️Impact: Waltz’s reassignment reflects Trump’s strategic reshuffling to optimize his administration’s efficiency, ensuring America First policies are advanced at the UN while national security gets a reset following ‘Signalgate.’
IN FULL:
President Donald J. Trump has announced that National Security Advisor Mike Waltz will be nominated for the position of United States Ambassador to the United Nations (UN). Secretary of State Marco Rubio will take over his national security role on an interim basis.
“I am pleased to announce that I will be nominating Mike Waltz to be the next United States Ambassador to the United Nations,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform. “From his time in uniform on the battlefield, in Congress and, as my National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz has worked hard to put our Nation’s Interests first,” he continued.
“I know he will do the same in his new role. In the interim, Secretary of State Marco Rubio will serve as National Security Advisor, while continuing his strong leadership at the State Department,” the America First leader added, concluding: “Together, we will continue to fight tirelessly to Make America, and the World, SAFE AGAIN.”
Rubio was previously named Acting Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), following its gutting by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), and Acting Archivist of the United States.
The National Pulse previously reported on sources saying Waltz’s removal as National Security Advisor was imminent, supposedly driven by a sense that the National Security Council was “not being run efficiently in an organized way,” rather than the so-called ‘Signalgate’ scandal, which saw Waltz accidentally add a hostile journalist to a group chat about strikes on the Houthis in Yemen.
Waltz’s nomination as UN ambassador suggests President Trump still values Waltz, but feels his talents could be better utilized elsewhere.
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.
❓What Happened: The Football Association (FA) in England has issued a decision to prohibit transgenders from participating in women’s soccer teams.
👥 Who’s Involved: The Football Association, the governing body of soccer in England, and male players who claim to be women.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍 Where & When: England; effective from June 1.
💬 Key Quote: “Transgender women will no longer be able to play in women’s football in England.” — Football Association.
⚠️ Impact: The ruling affects participation in both grassroots and professional women’s soccer, requiring adaptation to a recent Supreme Court ruling that women should be defined in terms of their biology for legal purposes.
IN FULL:
The English Football Association (FA) has announced that transgenders will be barred from competing on women’s soccer teams. This decision, effective from June, follows a recent ruling by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. The ruling clarified that Britain’s equality laws are founded on “biological sex,” and that female-identifying males do not meet the legal definition of women.
The FA’s policy shift is part of a broader movement among various organizations to comply with the Supreme Court’s judgment, directing all public and private bodies in Britain to comply regarding the access they provide to single-sex services and spaces.
This new ban affects grassroots soccer, regional leagues governed by the FA, and professional-level competition. The ruling has also prompted changes in other sports organizations. The Scottish Football Association (SFA) has announced that competitive girls’ and women’s football will be restricted to biological females beginning in the 2025-26 season.
The move comes after the London Marathon refused to ban biological men from competing as women in its mass participation category. Transgender athletes were prohibited from elite-level competition, but still able to record their race times as women in the mass participation race.
❓What Happened: A Joe Biden-appointed federal judge in Idaho has temporarily blocked a state immigration law that let local police arrest migrants suspected of unlawful entry if involved in other crimes.
👥 Who’s Involved: Federal Judge Amanda Brailsford, former President Joe Biden, Gov. Brad Little, and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Idaho.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍 Where & When: Idaho, with the law signed in March, and the preliminary injunction issued recently.
💬 Key Quote: “We are pleased the court recognized that enforcement of this law is harmful and unconstitutional,” gloated Emily Croston, ACLU of Idaho Staff Attorney.
⚠️ Impact: The enforcement of the law is halted, pending a review, as state attorneys consider their next steps.
IN FULL:
A federal judge has put a temporary hold on a controversial Idaho immigration bill, pausing local law enforcement’s ability to arrest migrants suspected of illegal entry if involved in other offenses. Federal Judge Amanda Brailsford, appointed by former President Joe Biden, issued a preliminary injunction on parts of House Bill 83, known as the Immigration Cooperation and Enforcement Act. The law, passed by Idaho’s legislature in March and immediately signed by Gov. Brad Little, criminalizes entry and reentry to the state.
The move follows a lawsuit from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Idaho. The organization contends that the bill unlawfully attempts to override federal immigration enforcement, effectively turning local police into immigration agents. Judge Brailsford claimed the ACLU showcased a likelihood of success on several claims, including potential violations of the U.S. Constitution’s due process clause and federal immigration preemption.
The court’s decision halts the state’s ability to enforce misdemeanor penalties on individuals entering Idaho unlawfully, which could escalate to felony charges if associated with further criminal activities. Such offenses could lead to federal deportation processes. The ACLU of Idaho has praised the injunction, claiming, “the court recognized that enforcement of this law is harmful and unconstitutional.”
The blockage of the Immigration Cooperation and Enforcement Act mirrors challenges faced by a similar Texas law, actively opposed by the federal government under Biden, highlighting ongoing guerrilla lawfare against border control policies by partisan organizations. Idaho’s Attorney General is currently evaluating the ruling to consider the state’s next steps.
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.
❓What Happened: Organizations posing as non-governmental organizations (NGOs), allegedly backed by the Chinese government, are increasingly involved at the United Nations (UN) to counter criticism of China’s human rights record.
👥 Who’s Involved: Chinese-backed NGOs, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), the Chinese government, the UN Human Rights Council, and human rights activists.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍 Where & When: United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland; information revealed in a report published on April 28.
💬 Key Quote: “In 2024, 33 Chinese NGOs showed up about 300 times on the lists of speakers at Human Rights Council sessions. There were only three of them in 2018. None criticized China,” the ICIJ report notes.
⚠️ Impact: This development may undermine the monitoring and documentation of global human rights violations by the UN, as Beijing’s influence alters the discourse and potentially silences dissent.
IN FULL:
The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) has reported that the Chinese government uses NGOs to squash criticism of its human rights abuses at the United Nations (UN). Released on April 28, this finding is part of a broader investigation into the communist state’s attempts at transnational repression under the leadership of Xi Jinping.
“Since Xi’s reelection as Communist Party general secretary in 2017 and president the following year, China has sought greater influence within the UN human rights system and become more aggressive in silencing dissent,” the ICIJ report states, adding that since 2018 the number of Chinese groups holding consultative status at the UN has nearly doubled. The report goes on to contend that of the 106 Chinese NGOs holding consultative status, 59 demonstrate concerning signs that they are “closely connected” with the regime in Beijing.
According to the ICIJ, ten of the Chinese NGOs receive over 50 percent of their funding from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Additionally, at least 46 NGOs are led by individuals who also hold official positions within the Chinese government. Even more troubling, the report states that 53 of the China-backed organizations openly pledge loyalty to the CCP on their websites. At the same time, another ten acknowledged that they defer key decision-making to Chinese government officials.
The CCP appears to primarily use the NGOs to push back against allegations that their regime has engaged in numerous human rights abuses, especially regarding religious and ethnic minorities like the Uyghurs. “In 2024, 33 Chinese NGOs showed up about 300 times on the lists of speakers at Human Rights Council sessions. There were only three of them in 2018. None criticized China,” the report notes.
Some human rights activists also contend that the NGOs are tasked with monitoring and intimidating individuals at the UN who are critical of Beijing’s actions.
❓What Happened: The husband of far-left U.S. District Court Judge Jennifer L. Thurston—who issued a preliminary injunction on Tuesday barring U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) operating within her court jurisdiction from stopping and detaining suspected illegal immigrants without a warrant—has a history of promoting mass immigration and appears to draw significant business from real estate investors that cater to the illegal immigrant and migrant communities. The revelation raises significant concerns as to whether Judge Thurston is ignoring a conflict of interest by presiding over a case dealing with the Trump administration’s efforts to deport the millions of illegal immigrants currently residing in the United States.
👥 Who’s Involved: U.S. District Court Judge Jennifer L. Thurston; her husband, Marc A Thurston, a real estate broker and investment advisor in California’s Central Valley; President Donald J. Trump, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem, and federal immigration officials with the CBP.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍 Where & When: Judge Thurston issued the preliminary injunction on Tuesday, April 27, while investigative journalist Laura Loomer revealed her husband’s business and advocacy ties to illegal immigrants on Thursday, May 1.
💬 Key Quote: “You just can’t walk up to people with brown skin and say, ‘Give me your papers, ‘” Judge Thurston declared during a hearing prior to her ruling.
⚠️ Impact: The injunction temporarily prevents federal immigration officials from stopping and detaining suspected illegal immigrants in the U.S. District Court’s Eastern District of California. However, if a conflict of interest due to her husband’s business interests can be demonstrated, it could force the far-left judge off the case and render the injunction invalid.
IN FULL:
A far-left U.S. District Court judge, who is temporarily barring the Trump administration from stopping and detaining suspected illegal immigrants in the Eastern District of California, is facing allegations that she ignored a potential conflict of interest that could bias how she presides over the matter. Judge Jennifer L. Thurston, appointed to the bench by former President Joe Biden in 2021, likely enjoys financial benefits drawn from the revenue produced by her husband Marc A. Thurston’s real estate brokerage, which appears to cater to landlords and property investors renting to illegal immigrants and migrant workers in California’s Central Valley.
Investigative journalist Laura Loomer revealed Marc Thurston’s business entanglements with illegal immigrants and migrant workers early on Thursday, highlighting that the real estate broker has made numerous public posts critical of the Trump administration’s crackdown on migrants unlawfully residing in the U.S. Additionally, Loomer notes that Judge Thurston’s husband has made multiple social media posts arguing the deporation operations in California will cause significant disruptions in the Central Valley’s real estate market.
“Changes in immigration policies could disrupt the rental market in the Central Valley, California. With 50% of agricultural workers renting and up to 30% of construction labor undocumented, up to 9,500 people could be displaced from their homes,” Mr. Thurston wrote in a post on LinkedIn three months ago. He added, “Landlords, stay proactive—vacancies may spike, and it’s crucial to keep your tenants happy and ready to adapt. Prepare for potential shifts and secure your investments! Let’s plan ahead.”
Notably, Title 28 of the U.S. Code, which lays out the guidelines for the Judiciary and Judicial Procedure, stipulates in clear terms that spousal business interests can present a disqualifying conflict of interest for federal judges. 28 U.S. Code § 455 (b)(4) states that a federal judge “shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which… He knows that he, individually or as a fiduciary, or his spouse or minor child residing in his household, has a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding.”
WATCH:
⚠️EXCLUSIVE:⚠️
The husband of California U.S. District Court Judge Jennifer L. Thurston, the judge who just ruled that President Trump’s administration can’t arrest any more illegal aliens unless they have a warrant for their arrest, is a multifamily real estate broker in… pic.twitter.com/yBly0fNFPN
❓What Happened: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents have reportedly been reassigned for participating in a public protest by kneeling to Black Lives Matter (BLM).
👥 Who’s Involved: FBI agents involved in a 2020 protest, the FBI, CNN, the Department of Justice (DOJ), and President Donald J. Trump.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍 Where & When: The protest occurred in Washington, D.C., in June 2020.
💬 Key Quote: A former FBI official complained, “This notion that the bureau would go after these people, it’s just disgusting.”
⚠️ Impact: The reassignments are seen as a demotion and may discourage further partisan activities by public officials. The DOJ is reviewing the conduct of many agents regarding politicized cases and incidents.
IN FULL:
Several Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents have reportedly been reassigned for taking part in a June 2020 protest by kneeling to Black Lives Matter (BLM) following the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis. The reassignments are perceived as demotions, and they occurred without any formal explanation, according to CNN, citing anonymous sources.
The FBI has chosen not to comment on the personnel changes, and responses from the affected agents have not been provided. The agents took a knee during a protest in Washington, D.C.
NEW: FBI agents photographed kneeling during George Floyd protest have been removed from their positions – CNN pic.twitter.com/yCVX2a3rK9
The catalyst for the protest was the death of George Floyd. The convicted armed robber, who was on fentanyl at the time and had heart disease, died after a police officer, Derek Chauvin, knelt on his neck during an arrest. Chauvin was later found guilty of Floyd’s murder in 2021, despite some dispute as to whether or not he caused his death.
A former FBI official criticized the bureau’s approach, accusing it of bypassing the usual disciplinary processes in handling the agents. The official complained that the agents’ treatment was “disgusting.”
The reassignments align with President Donald J. Trump’s objective to remove or at least disempower politically motivated personnel at the FBI. Notably, the Department of Justice (DOJ) is conducting a review of the actions of over 1,500 FBI personnel connected to politically charged cases impacting President Trump.
The review by the DOJ could have significant implications for the bureau, especially concerning the treatment of internal dissent and political activities among its agents.
❓What Happened: President Donald J. Trump is set to replace Mike Waltz as his National Security Advisor, according to journalist Mark Halperin, who cited three sources.
👥 Who’s Involved: President Trump, Mike Waltz, journalist Mark Halperin, and Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg are central figures. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is also indirectly involved.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍 Where & When: The information was reported on May 1, 2025, and relates to events primarily occurring at the White House and involving communications about military actions in Yemen.
💬 Key Quote: “[T]here’s lots of levels of unhappiness, and it’s less about Signalgate than it is about… a general belief that it’s not being run efficiently in an organized way.” — Mark Halperin.
⚠️ Impact: Waltz’s reputation within the administration has suffered, and his handling of the ‘Signalgate’ controversy resulted in significant negative media coverage.
IN FULL:
President Donald J. Trump is reportedly planning to appoint a new National Security Advisor to replace Mike Waltz. Journalist Mark Halperin made the claim, relying on information from three informed sources. The White House National Security Council has not responded to inquiries regarding the matter.
Waltz, currently serving as the National Security Advisor, did not signal any impending changes to his position during an appearance on Fox and Friends on Thursday morning. His tenure has been marked by challenges, particularly surrounding a controversy known as ‘Signalgate.’
The incident involved Waltz inadvertently including Jeffrey Goldberg, editor of The Atlantic, in a classified Signal chat discussing military operations against the Houthis in Yemen with high-ranking officials. Goldberg subsequently released the full content of these messages, leading to multiple weeks of critical media coverage and casting a shadow over Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s leadership.
Despite the pressures, President Trump initially opted not to dismiss Waltz, partly to avoid providing a perceived victory to Goldberg. However, Waltz’s attempt to justify the error during a Fox News interview is said to have further impaired his standing within the White House.
Halperin notes that “[T]here’s lots of levels of unhappiness” with Waltz, and that his supposedly impending dismissal is “less about Signalgate than it is about… a general belief that it’s not being run efficiently in an organized way.”
He adds that the dismissal could happen as soon as today or this weekend, but will likely be “soon”—although he concedes that President Trump could ultimately decide not to dismiss Waltz at all.
WATCH:
Breaking: @MarkHalperin reports that Michael Waltz is OUT at NSC https://t.co/aTZeLl0rE0
❓What Happened: Elon Musk described his first 100 days leading the Department of Government Efficiency as “intense,” noting progress but expressing frustration over challenges due to entrenched interests.
👥 Who’s Involved: Elon Musk, Steve Davis, Antonio Gracias, Anthony Armstrong, President Donald Trump.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍 Where & When: White House, Washington, D.C., Roosevelt Room, April 30, 2025.
💬 Key Quote: Musk stated, “I think we’ve been effective, not as effective as I’d like.”
⚠️ Impact: Musk’s administration claims $160 billion saved in taxpayer money. He acknowledged difficulties in reaching the $1 trillion savings goal, citing government inertia as a major obstacle.
IN FULL:
Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) frontman Elon Musk, reflecting on his first 100 days in the role, has described them as “very, very intense.” During a meeting in the Roosevelt Room at the White House, Musk and top DOGE officials Steve Davis, Antonio Gracias, and Anthony Armstrong reviewed their initial progress in Washington. Musk said that despite saving taxpayers a claimed $160 billion—far below his earlier ambitions—entrenched interests hindered the department’s effectiveness.
“I think we’ve been effective, not as effective as I’d like, I think we could be more effective, but we made progress,” Musk said. The South Africa-born tech mogul initially claimed a potential $2 trillion saving, later revising expectations to $1 trillion.
Acknowledging his difficulty in reaching even the revised goal, Musk criticized the federal budgeting system, likening reform efforts to altering the path of a fleet of supertankers. He claims savings currently average $1.6 billion per day, blaming Congress and the Cabinet for the lack of further progress, saying it comes down to “how much pain is the Cabinet and Congress willing to take.”
Musk shared insights into his Washington routine, revealing occasional stays in the White House’s Lincoln Bedroom and working seven days a week at times. However, he plans to reduce his on-site presence amid damage to his Tesla business. “DOGE is a way of life… like Buddhism… you wouldn’t ask the question, ‘Who would lead Buddhism?'” he said, downplaying the significance of his potential departure.
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.
❓What Happened: Reports suggest that Democratic House leader Hakeem Jeffries showed little support for Democrats who have traveled to El Salvador advocating for deported illegal immigrants.
👥 Who’s Involved: House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries, Senator Chris Van Hollen, Representatives Robert Garcia, Yassamin Ansari, Maxwell Frost, Maxine Dexter, President Donald J. Trump, and deported illegals such as accused MS-13 gangster and wife-beater Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍 Where & When: The reported events and discussions have taken place in the United States, with trips organized to El Salvador’s CECOT prison.
💬 Key Quote: Jeffries stated, “Our reaction [to the trips] is that Donald Trump has the lowest approval rating of any president in modern American history,” deflecting from addressing the actions of his fellow Democrats directly.
⚠️ Impact: The disagreement exemplifies the ongoing internal conflicts within the Democratic Party.
IN FULL:
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries is reportedly advising restraint to Democrats traveling to El Salvador to advocate for deported illegal aliens. Reports suggest Jeffries seemed to sidestep support for Democrats who have embarked on missions to the country.
When probed about fellow party members’ travels and their objectives, Jeffries veered the discussion towards President Donald J. Trump‘s approval ratings. Jeffries has reportedly cautioned against escalating actions with respect to the deportations to El Salvador. This comes after visits to the country involving figures like Senator Chris Van Hollen and Representatives Robert Garcia, among others.
There appears to be some division within the Democratic Party over this approach. While leaders like Jeffries and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer maintain a more reserved stance, others within the party are pushing for proactive measures on behalf of deported migrants.
A spokesman for Jeffries refuted claims that his office actively discourages the trips. They asserted that the minority leader will persist in advocating for those like Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a deported illegal linked to MS-13 who was once arrested on suspicion of human trafficking and accused of violent abuse by his wife. The Democrats insist he is a “Maryland man” deported unlawfully.
The situation highlights the ongoing strife within the Democratic Party. Others, such as Democratic National Committee vice chair and anti-gun rights activist David Hogg, are pushing to purge candidates who are not deemed woke or progressive enough.
Hogg’s statements have drawn ire from Democrat stalwarts like James Carville, who referred to Hogg as a “contemptible little twerp.”
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
Share Story
FacebookTwitterWhatsappTruthTelegramGettrCopy Link
Real News Fan? Show It!
Many people are shocked to learn that because of active censorship, we currently have to spend more time making sure you can even see The National Pulse, than on producing the news itself. Which sucks. Because we do this for the truth, and for you.
But the regime doesn’t want you being informed. That’s why they want us to go away. And that will happen if more people don’t sign up to support our work. It’s basic supply and demand. So demand you get to read The National Pulse, unrestricted. Sign up, today.
We don’t sell ads, and refuse corporate or political cash. It all comes down to you, the reader. I hope you can help.
.jpg){kind=link}
