Pornhub, a leading online portal for adult content, has suspended its services in Texas in response to a newly enacted state law requiring commercial adult content websites to verify that users are at least 18 years old before providing access to explicit material.
In a public message, Pornhub explained its reluctance to comply with the law, insisting that requiring age verification intrudes upon individuals’ rights to access adult content and argues that it fails in its objective to safeguard minors. The adult entertainment company, however, has agreed to honor the law by disabling their service in the state.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
Authorities in Texas welcomed the news, with Texas Family Project President Brady Gray stating, “Texas families just keep winning!” Gray went on to acknowledge pro-family advocates who played key roles in advancing the legislative agenda.
House Bill 1181 enforces a $10,000 daily penalty for platforms that fail to confirm users’ age. Pornhub, among others, made futile attempts to prevent the bill from taking effect, arguing that it contravened the First Amendment and users’ privacy rights. Despite a temporary reprieve granted by a lower court, the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the law’s constitutionality.
Despite its claims to the contrary, PornHub behaves as if it wants minors to access its explicit, pornographic content. The same age-verification protocol has been enacted in seven other states, with Pornhub similarly opting to restrict access instead of implementing verification mechanisms. Last month, Texas AG Ken Paxton sued Pornhub’s parent company Aylo for refusing to comply with the new regulation.
This comes as the company contends with multiple lawsuits alleging exploitation of underage victims. In February, a Pornhub spokeswoman advocated for sex ed in kindergarten and implied she had watched children masturbate.
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.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: The Senate voted to end President Donald Trump’s tariffs in a 51-47 vote.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Republican Sens. Mitch McConnell, Rand Paul, Susan Collins, and Lisa Murkowski joined Democrats to back the measure.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The vote took place on Thursday in the Senate.
🎯IMPACT: President Trump’s authority to impose tariffs remains legally intact, as the Senate bill is highly unlikely to be approved by the House or signed by President Trump. Trade agreements with key partners are already in place.
IN FULL
The Senate voted 51-47 on Thursday to end President Donald J. Trump‘s global reciprocal tariffs, with four Republican senators joining all Democrats in supporting the measure. Two senators did not vote.
Sens. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Rand Paul (R-KY), Susan Collins (R-ME), and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) were the Republicans who voted in favor of the Democrat measure to end the tariff emergency. Both McConnell and Paul have openly opposed President Trump’s tariff policies for months, despite mounting evidence that the America First leader’s trade levies have rebalanced international markets and encouraged the reshoring of American jobs.
Despite the Senate vote, the Democrat-led legislation is not expected to take effect. The Republican-controlled House and insufficient Senate support to override an almost certain veto from President Trump make its passage unlikely.
The U.S. Supreme Court will take up a challenge to Trump’s tariffs in November, with the government expected to emphasize the foreign policy aspect of trade policy, rooting the levies purely under presidential authority.
In April, Sen. Paul announced he would back Senate Democrats’ anti-tariff efforts, declaring that “Taxation without representation is tyranny”—despite President Trump running on tariffs in 2024 and having a clear mandate from the American people.
Also in Paril, Paul and McConnell joined a Democratic resolution challenging President Trump’s tariffs on imports from Canada, which passed out of the Senate on a 51-48 vote. The bill has not moved in the House, effectively being rendered dead.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: King Charles III has announced that his younger brother, Prince Andrew, is to be formally stripped of his titles and honors, and evicted from the Royal Lodge. Andrew, who will now be known as Mr. Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, had previously said he would no longer use his titles.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: King Charles III, Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, and Andrew’s daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: Announcement issued by Buckingham Palace on October 30, 2025.
💬KEY QUOTE: “Formal notice has now been served to surrender the lease [on the Royal Lodge] and he will move to alternative private accommodation.” – Buckingham Palace.
🎯IMPACT: Andrew will no longer be referred to as a prince; his daughters retain their titles as granddaughters of the late Queen Elizabeth II.
IN FULL
Prince Andrew is to be formally stripped of his titles and honors by King Charles III, according to an announcement from Buckingham Palace issued on Thursday. The statement confirmed that he will now be referred to as Mr. Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and evicted from the Royal Lodge.
“His Majesty has today initiated a formal process to remove the Style, Titles and Honours of Prince Andrew,” the statement reads. “Prince Andrew will now be known as Andrew Mountbatten Windsor. His lease on Royal Lodge has, to date, provided him with legal protection to continue in residence. Formal notice has now been served to surrender the lease and he will move to alternative private accommodation.”
The statement adds that “These censures are deemed necessary, notwithstanding the fact that he continues to deny the allegations against him,” referring to accusations that the late Virginia Giuffre, a sex trafficking victim of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, was coerced by the pair into sleeping with Andrew when she was 17.
“Their Majesties wish to make clear that their thoughts and utmost sympathies have been, and will remain with, the victims and survivors of any and all forms of abuse,” the Palace added.
Andrew recently announced he would no longer use his titles, while stressing he had done nothing wrong, but the King is now moving to formalize the situation. Notably, the soon-to-be former prince has also been under fire in recent weeks for meeting with a Chinese spymaster on multiple occasions.
While Andrew has been stripped of his titles, his daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, are to retain their royal statuses as granddaughters of Queen Elizabeth. A source noted that King Charles III is keen to protect them, saying, “He wouldn’t have wanted to sign off on anything that would impact them.”
The King is understood to have made it clear that further actions would be taken against Andrew if he attempted to resist the process of downgrading his position, citing his “intolerable” behavior and lack of contrition.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: New York Governor Kathy Hochul (D) declared a state of emergency as millions of residents face the loss of food assistance due to the ongoing federal shutdown.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Governor Kathy Hochul, Republicans and Democrats in Congress, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), and other state leaders, including Governor Gavin Newsom (D-CA).
📍WHEN & WHERE: The announcement was made on Thursday, with the shutdown now in its 30th day, impacting New York and other states across the U.S.
💬KEY QUOTE: “I am doing everything in my power to soften the blow of the destruction Republicans in Washington are inflicting on our state,” said Governor Hochul, despite the fact that it is the Senate Democrats who are blocking funding.
🎯IMPACT: Around three million New Yorkers could lose benefits worth $650 million a month.
IN FULL
New York’s Governor Kathy Hochul (D) has declared a state of emergency as millions of residents face losing food assistance on November 1 due to the ongoing Democrat-caused federal government shutdown. The governor is trying to blame Republicans in Congress for the funding lapse, saying Democrats have been pushing for clean resolutions to restore funding, despite the fact that Democrats have repeatedly blocked GOP spending legislation.
Hochul announced $65 million in emergency state funds to help food programs across New York. “The Trump Administration is cutting food assistance off for three million New Yorkers, leaving our state to face an unprecedented public health crisis and hurting our grocers, bodegas, and farmers along the way,” she alleged.
The federal shutdown, now in its 30th day, has disrupted the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, which provides food benefits to 42 million Americans. The U.S. Department of Agriculture confirmed that contingency funds used to maintain SNAP during previous shutdowns have been exhausted, marking the first time the program has faced a complete lapse in funding. In New York alone, about three million residents risk losing $650 million in monthly benefits.
The Trump administration stated that it could not reallocate other federal funds to cover the November payments, citing legal restrictions. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) defended the decision, saying, “If they transferred funds from other sources, it would pull it away immediately from school meals and infant formula. It’s a tradeoff.”
Other governors have also stepped in as the shutdown continues. California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) deployed the National Guard to assist food banks, while Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin (R) announced plans to declare a state of emergency. Hochul’s office stated that New York’s emergency aid is a temporary measure intended to prevent hunger while negotiations continue in Washington.
The crisis follows weeks of partisan deadlock. Earlier this month, House Democratic Whip Katherine Clark boasted that the hardships faced by Americans could be used as leverage against the GOP in the standoff. “Of course, there will be families that are going to suffer,” she said. “But it is one of the few leverage times we have.”
At the same time, President Donald J. Trump has touted a reduction in SNAP dependency since his administration began, saying that more than 600,000 Americans have left the program. Data cited by his team show that from January to May 2025, SNAP participation fell from 42.38 million to 41.73 million, a decline of roughly 645,000 recipients.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Dutch populist Geert Wilders and his Party for Freedom (PVV) appear to be tied at 26 seats with the liberal-progressive D66 party following national elections in the Netherlands.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Geert Wilders’s Party for Freedom and Rob Jetten’s D66 party.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The election took place on Wednesday in the Netherlands.
💬KEY QUOTE: “The difference between the two leading parties was just over 2,000 votes nationwide,” according to Dutch national news agency ANP.
🎯IMPACT: The unprecedented tie is expected to delay the formation of a new coalition government.
IN FULL
The Dutch populist Party for Freedom (PVV), led by Geert Wilders, and the liberal-progressive Democrats 66 (D66), led by Rob Jetten, both appear to have secured 26 seats in the Dutch legislature with 98 percent of votes counted, according to figures published by the Dutch national news agency ANP. The difference between the two parties was reported to be just over 2,000 votes nationwide, marking the first time in Dutch history that a national election has concluded in such a tie.
The results show Wilders’s PVV losing 11 seats in the 150-member House of Representatives, while D66 gained 11. This razor-thin outcome is expected to prolong and complicate coalition negotiations, a process already notorious for taking months in the Netherlands’ fragmented political landscape.
Wilders reacted to the results, saying, “At the top with 26 seats just like D66. Nobody beats the PVV. Absolutely nobody! The entire campaign attacked by other parties and ‘journalists’, but they won’t bring us down, we stand tall and proud at the top and no other party has more than our 26 seats!!”
The vote follows years of turbulence in Dutch politics. In 2023, the government of long-serving liberal Prime Minister Mark Rutte collapsed after his four-party coalition failed to agree on asylum policies, particularly family reunification rules. Migration has remained one of the country’s most divisive issues, fueling the rise of populists like Wilders, who has long advocated for tighter border controls and a tougher stance on immigration and Islamization.
Economic and social tensions surrounding immigration have also intensified. A major study found that mass migration cost the Netherlands nearly half a trillion dollars between 1995 and 2019. These findings have intensified public debate over the long-term sustainability of migration policies and the pressure they place on housing, healthcare, and social welfare systems.
As the vote count nears completion, the tie between PVV and D66 has thrown the process of government formation into uncertainty. Building a majority coalition will require negotiations among multiple parties with sharply differing priorities. Analysts warn that forming a stable government could take months, or potentially trigger another round of elections if talks fail.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: The federal government in Germany has revealed that over 135,000 crimes were committed by Syrian suspects between 2015 and 2024, averaging one every 39 minutes.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The Federal Ministry of the Interior, Alternative for Germany (AfD) co-leader Alice Weidel, AfD Bundestag (federal parliament) member Christopher Drößler, and other political figures.
📍WHEN & WHERE: Germany, between 2015 and 2024, with data released in response to a parliamentary inquiry.
💬KEY QUOTE: “This development is not only extremely alarming but also the result of government mismanagement and uncorrected political misjudgments.” – Alice Weidel
🎯IMPACT: The figures have reignited calls for stricter migration controls, large-scale deportations, and increased border security in Germany.
IN FULL
Newly released government statistics have ignited fierce debate over immigration policy in Germany, revealing that suspects of Syrian origin were linked to 135,668 crimes between 2015 and 2024, one every 39 minutes on average. The figures were disclosed by the Federal Ministry of the Interior in response to a parliamentary query from the populist, anti-mass migration Alternative for Germany (AfD) party. The data has prompted renewed demands for stricter border controls and mass deportations, as critics decry migrants’ toll on public safety.
The report also tallies significant offenses tied to other nationalities: 82,960 from Afghanistan, 69,946 from Iraq, 39,918 from Morocco, and 32,383 from Algeria. In total, suspects from the top 10 countries of origin accounted for more than 460,000 violations over the decade.
AfD co-leader Alice Weidel seized on the numbers to blast the coalition government. “More than half of all women in Germany no longer feel safe in public spaces. This alarming figure is further proof of the government’s failure. Between 2015 and 2024, 135,668 Germans were victims of crimes committed by suspected Syrian perpetrators. This development is not only extremely alarming but also the result of government mismanagement and uncorrected political misjudgments,” she said.
Christopher Drößler, the AfD Bundestag (federal parliament) member who initiated the inquiry, echoed the sentiment and pushed for aggressive action. “Numbers don’t lie. The statistics confirm once again: Germans are primarily victims of criminal foreigners from [Middle] Eastern countries,” he said. Drößler advocated for enabling deportations to Syria, Afghanistan, Morocco, and Iraq, stressing the AfD as the only party with “clear solutions” like fortified borders, swift deportations of criminal migrants, and more police resources.
The controversy unfolds against a backdrop of explosive growth in Germany’s Syrian community. By late 2023, their numbers had ballooned to at least 972,000, a 16-fold increase from 60,000 in 2014. Overall, around one in 20 Syrians now live in Germany. Of these, over half, or more than 513,000, depend on welfare benefits such as Bürgergeld, with migrants comprising nearly half of all recipients. Foreigner-related expenditures reached €50 billion in 2023 alone, part of a €145 billion total since 2010. Studies show elevated violent crime rates among groups like Syrians and Afghans compared to native Germans.
High-profile offenses have heightened fears about migrant crime. On October 28, 2025, for instance, four Syrian teenagers and a 22-year-old Iraqi woman were arrested in Hamburg for allegedly throwing a 15-year-old Iraqi boy to his death from an eighth-floor apartment. Earlier in October, prosecutors in Heinsberg charged five Syrian men, adults and juveniles, with gang-raping a 17-year-old girl. These cases underscore the raw nerves exposed by the data, as the AfD leverages them to challenge the status quo on migration and security.
💬KEY QUOTE: “These are not isolated incidents or clerical errors.” – Dan Backer
🎯IMPACT: Allegations of foreign contributions could lead to fines, but enforcement appears unlikely.
IN FULL
Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic Party’s socialist nominee in New York City‘s mayoral race, is under scrutiny following two criminal referrals filed by the Coolidge Reagan Foundation. The complaints allege that Mamdani, a Ugandan immigrant, accepted nearly $13,000 from at least 170 donors located outside the United States, which would be a violation of federal and local campaign finance laws.
Dan Backer, president of the Coolidge Reagan Foundation and a national campaign finance expert, stated, “These are not isolated incidents or clerical errors.” He further asserted that this represented “a sustained pattern of foreign money flowing into a New York City mayoral race,” accusing the campaign of failing to take meaningful action to prevent such violations despite being “on notice for months.”
The Mamdani campaign has responded by claiming that 31 of the 170 donors have proven their citizenship or legal permanent residence, and that the remaining 139 donations have been refunded. However, the criminal referral argues that refunding questionable donations does not rectify the violation.
“Despite being well aware of this influx of illegal foreign contributions, it appears he did nothing throughout most of 2025 to prevent his campaign from accepting them in the first place,” reads the referral. Notably, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) can only impose fines, and local prosecutors are unlikely to pursue charges.
The National Pulse reported in July that during the Democratic Party’s New York City mayoral primary, Mamdani’s campaign was bolstered by political dark money operations, including over $2 million in PAC spending, mostly from Silicon Valley billionaires and a cadre of elite Democratic Party donors.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: NBC Bay Area is being criticized for omitting the criminal history of an illegal immigrant featured in their report on a federal arrest.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Gerardo Rojas-Leyva, federal agents, NBC Bay Area, and the Department of Homeland Security.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The arrest occurred last week in San Jose, California, as Rojas-Leyva was leaving his home for work.
💬KEY QUOTE: “Why is [NBC Bay Area] peddling a hoax for a PEDOPHILE?” – Department of Homeland Security.
🎯IMPACT: The omission of Rojas-Leyva’s criminal background has fueled criticism of media narratives surrounding federal immigration enforcement operations.
IN FULL
An NBC News affiliate is facing backlash for attempting to portray an illegal immigrant with an extensive criminal background—including lewd and lascivious acts with a child—as merely an “undocumented father.” The coverage mirrors similar corporate media attempts to portray Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an alleged MS-13 gang member facing human trafficking charges, as a more sympathetic “Maryland father with protected legal status.”
Gerardo Rojas-Leyva, an illegal immigrant whose arrest by federal agents was covered by NBC Bay Area—a California affiliate station covering San Francisco, San Jose, and Oakland—has “a rap sheet including lewd and lascivious acts with a child, battery of a spouse, domestic battery, and providing compensation for prostitution,” according to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Despite his criminal record, NBC Bay Area sought to frame Rojas-Leyva as a victim after his arrest last week.
Federal officers approached Rojas-Leyva, 42, as he sat in his black truck at 7:45 AM, instructing him to exit the vehicle. NBC Bay Area reported that his family and neighbors recorded the arrest, with his wife, Idalia, claiming that a woman who was not in uniform struck her 22-year-old daughter with a baton. However, this alleged incident was not visible in the footage.
Following the publication of the story, DHS publicly criticized NBC Bay Area on X (formerly Twitter), stating, “Why is [NBC Bay Area] peddling a hoax for a PEDOPHILE?” DHS went on to detail Rojas-Leyva’s criminal history.
The department also noted that Rojas-Leyva had illegally re-entered the United States after a prior removal, which constitutes a felony. They emphasized the Trump administration’s commitment to prioritizing the removal of criminal illegal immigrants, stating, “President Trump and [DHS Secretary Kristi Noem] are removing criminal illegal alien predators from our communities and putting the safety of Americans FIRST.”
Why is @NBCBayArea peddling a hoax for a PEDOPHILE?
Here are the FACTS: @ICEgov arrested Gerardo Rojas-Leyva, a criminal illegal alien from Mexico, with a rap sheet including lewd and lascivious acts with a child, battery of a spouse, domestic battery, and providing… pic.twitter.com/BWyUsWjAml
❓WHAT HAPPENED: President Donald J. Trump’s summit with Chinese leader Xi Jinping has yielded some benefits for American farmers, manufacturers, and consumers—although the meeting appears to have only paused the U.S.-China tradewar rather than brought it to a comprehensive conclusion.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: President Trump, Chinese leader Xi Jinping, and U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The agreement was announced on Thursday.
💬KEY QUOTE: “So you know, our great soybean farmers, who the Chinese used as political pawns, that’s off the table, and they should prosper in the years to come,” – Scott Bessent.
🎯IMPACT: China agreed to increase its purchases of U.S. soybeans, finalize approval for the sale of TikTok, delay the implementation of rare earth mineral export controls, and crack down on the export of fentanyl precursors. In exchange, Trump agreed to slight reductions in U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods.
IN FULL
President Donald J. Trump‘s summit with Chinese leader Xi Jinping has yielded some benefits for American farmers, manufacturers, and consumers—although the meeting appears to have only paused the trade war rather than brought it to a comprehensive conclusion. China agreed to increase its purchases of U.S. soybeans, finalize approval for the sale of TikTok, delay the implementation of rare earth mineral export controls, and crack down on the export of fentanyl precursors. In exchange, Trump agreed to slight reductions in U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods.
“It was an amazing meeting,” President Trump said aboard Air Force One after departing the summit with Xi, held in South Korea. He ranked the talks, “Twelve out of ten.”
The most significant development to emerge from the summit was China’s three-year agreement to purchase 25 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans annually. “So you know, our great soybean farmers, who the Chinese used as political pawns, that’s off the table, and they should prosper in the years to come,” Trump’s Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent detailed Thursday morning. As part of the trade dispute with the U.S., China had slashed its imports of American soybeans to near zero.
Additionally, Secretary Bessent revealed that President Trump secured Xi’s approval for the sale of the TikTok social media app. “In Kuala Lumpur, we finalized the TikTok agreement in terms of getting Chinese approval, and I would expect that would go forward in the coming weeks and months, and we’ll finally see a resolution to that,” the Treasury Secretary said.
Trump also forced Xi to, at least for the moment, back down from imposing unprecedented export controls on Chinese rare earth minerals, refined rare earth materials, and equipment needed to process rare earths. Set to take effect on December 1, 2025—and impact nearly every country around the world—China agreed to delay export control implementation for one year. However, Xi ultimately did not remove the threat entirely.
Lastly, President Trump announced that Xi pledged to work “very hard to stop the flow” of fentanyl precursors to Central and South American drug cartels. Precisely what measures the Chinese intended to implement to stymie its lucrative illicit drug industry are unclear.
In exchange, Trump agreed to cut a 10 percent tariff on Chinese goods, imposed in response to the fentanyl trade, in half. This will effectively bring the overall tariff rate on Chinese exports from 57 percent to 47 percent. While the concessions made by Xi mark a degree of progress and cooling of trade tensions, markets appear to have already largely priced in the progress. By and large, market analysts see the summit outcome as a tactical pause, but expect U.S.-led global efforts to decouple from China to continue.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Nearly 40,000 inmates have been released early in England and Wales under a government scheme aimed at tackling prison overcrowding.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The Ministry of Justice (MOJ), former Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood, and prison officials across England and Wales.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The scheme began in September 2024, with releases continuing through June 2025 across various prisons in England and Wales.
💬KEY QUOTE: “The criminal justice system was on the verge of collapse.” – Shabana Mahmood
🎯IMPACT: The scheme has temporarily alleviated overcrowding, but at the cost of public safety, and long-term prison capacity and operational challenges remain.
IN FULL
An estimated 40,000 prisoners across England and Wales have been released early under the Labour government’s emergency program, which it says is aimed at addressing prison overcrowding. According to the Ministry of Justice (MOJ), 38,042 inmates were freed as of June 2025 after the program was launched on September 10, 2024. The program allows eligible prisoners to be released after serving just 40 percent of their sentence, instead of the usual 50 percent.
The initiative came as the prison population hit a record 88,521, with officials warning that male prisons could reach zero capacity by November 2025. His Majesty’s Prison (HMP) Humber in Brough has released the highest number of inmates under the Labour government scheme (1,126), followed by Berwyn in Wrexham (1,064), Fosse Way in Leicester (1,037), and Parc B in Bridgend (830).
Then-Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood—currently the Home Secretary, roughly equivalent to U.S. Homeland Security Secretary—introduced legislation in September 2024 to address the crisis, stating, “The criminal justice system was on the verge of collapse.” However critics have noted that a lack of asylum accommodation has not stopped the government from allowing an ever-increasing number of boat migrants to lodge claims, with additional spaces for them always being funded at the taxpayers’ expense. Spending on migrant hotels alone is now more than the entire prison budget.
Notably, figures show that as of September 30, 2025, the prison population in England and Wales was 87,465, with 12.3 percent being foreign nationals. Prisons suffer serious operational issues related to foreign criminals, as highlighted by a recent incident where a migrant pedophile was mistakenly released instead of being transferred to an immigration detention center for deportation.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: A former Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) special agent has alleged that the agency uses its internal review processes to retaliate against whistleblowers.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Valentine Fertitta, a former FBI special agent, and his wife Emily Fertitta, a former FBI employee, along with their attorney Matthew Crotty.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The events began in 2021 following Fertitta’s return from an overseas deployment and have continued through his ongoing clearance dispute.
💬KEY QUOTE: “This is an agency that makes loyalty part and parcel to its core—and if you go against it by trying any of these internal processes—[they] are going to get back at you.” – Matthew Crotty
🎯IMPACT: The Fertitta family’s case highlights broader concerns about whistleblower protections within the FBI, with implications for national security and federal employment law.
IN FULL
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), under the former Biden government, has been accused of retaliating against whistleblowers by using its internal review processes to discourage complaints, according to former special agent Valentine Fertitta. Fertitta’s case began in 2021 after he returned from an overseas deployment with serious injuries, which limited his workplace productivity. A manager’s dissatisfaction with his reduced output led to Fertitta being blocked from a promotion, which he believed violated federal employment law.
Fertitta filed a whistleblower complaint after alleging that the FBI violated protections for injured employees and veterans. Shortly after, he received his first-ever negative performance review and faced additional challenges, including being asked to provide past, present, and future medical records, according to his wife, Emily Fertitta. The case escalated when Fertitta appealed to the Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management (OARM), the FBI’s internal body for whistleblower retaliation claims. Within weeks, the FBI began evaluating his security clearance.
“The key thing is the timing,” said the Fertitta family’s attorney, Matthew Crotty. He continued: “Within two weeks of Val starting this OARM process, the FBI starts to investigate Val’s suitability to hold a top-secret security clearance.” Crotty explained that revoking a clearance is a way the FBI can effectively terminate an employee without formally firing them. During this process, Fertitta’s pay was suspended, and his wife, Emily, was pressured to testify against him without access to legal counsel. Emily Fertitta eventually resigned from the FBI.
The Fertitta family’s case is ongoing, with a pending civil lawsuit against the FBI. Crotty noted that the Supreme Court has granted the FBI broad authority over employee security clearances, leaving agents with little external recourse. “It doesn’t matter who’s in the White House. It’s a structural FBI thing. It’s been going on since Hoover,” Crotty stated. He added that Congress could address the issue by allowing FBI reservists to take retaliation claims to federal court.
According to records, the OARM has received 107 whistleblower complaints in the past decade, with only nine cases identified as retaliation. Emily Fertitta emphasized the broader implications of their struggle, saying, “This is much bigger than Val and Emily. It applies to so many other people who just don’t have the ability to speak up.”
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
Share Story
FacebookTwitterWhatsappTruthTelegramGettrCopy Link
Real News Fan? Show It!
Many people are shocked to learn that because of active censorship, we currently have to spend more time making sure you can even see The National Pulse, than on producing the news itself. Which sucks. Because we do this for the truth, and for you.
But the regime doesn’t want you being informed. That’s why they want us to go away. And that will happen if more people don’t sign up to support our work. It’s basic supply and demand. So demand you get to read The National Pulse, unrestricted. Sign up, today.
We don’t sell ads, and refuse corporate or political cash. It all comes down to you, the reader. I hope you can help.
.JPG){kind=link}
