Legendary defense attorney and former Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz says JudgeJuanMerchan behaved like an “absolute tyrant” during former President Donald J. Trump‘s Manhattan-based hush money trial on Monday. In an op-ed for the New York Post, Dershowitz blasted the Democrat-aligned judge over his political bias and treatment of Trump’s legal defense team.
Dershowitz noted Judge Merchan’s seemingly consistent rulings against the defense and excluding what he described as “obviously relevant evidence” while allowing the prosecution to present “irrelevant evidence.” He emphasized that, in his 60 years of legal experience across multiple countries, he had never witnessed a judge behave like Merchan.
The former Harvard law professor also shed further light on a fiery exchange between Merchan and defense witness Robert Costello — which resulted in Judge Merchan briefly clearing the courtroom. According to Dershowitz — who was able to remain in the chamber despite the judge’s order — the judge threatened the witness, telling him he would “strike all of Costello’s testimony if he raised his eyebrows again.”
Before clearing the room, Merchan repeatedly chastised Costello for rolling his eyes and making utterances in response to the judge’s rulings on the prosecution‘s objections. Dershowitz argued Merchan’s threat was unconstitutional, potentially violating Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial and to confront witnesses. He called Merchan’s response to Costello “absolutely outrageous, unethical, unlawful and petty.”
Such judicial conduct, Dershowitz contends, demonstrates a significant bias against the defense.
show less
Legendary defense attorney and former Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz says JudgeJuanMerchan behaved like an "absolute tyrant" during former President Donald J. Trump's Manhattan-based hush money trial on Monday. In an op-ed for the New York Post, Dershowitz blasted the Democrat-aligned judge over his political bias and treatment of Trump's legal defense team.
show more
The French-led campaign for deeper NATO involvement inside Ukrainian borders is gaining traction among European allies, according to a spokesperson for President Emmanuel Macron‘s political party. The proposal includes deploying NATO forces in Ukraine in non-combat roles to counter Russian aggression.
Benjamin Haddad, a member of parliament for Macron‘s Renaissance party and an influential voice in French foreign policy, discussed the initiative at the Lennart Meri Conference in Estonia last week. Haddad emphasized the necessity for NATO and the European Union to “turn the tables” on Russian President Vladimir Putin after more than two years of full-scale conflict.
Haddad noted increasing support from European nations, particularly those bordering Russia. Figures such as Czech President Petr Pavel, Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas, Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski, and Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis have expressed openness to discussing the proposal. “These countries are on the front line and have long distrusted Paris and Berlin,” Haddad remarked, highlighting the significance of their support.
The initiative aims to alleviate pressure on Ukrainian forces currently stationed at the border with Belarus. Haddad suggested the deployment of Western troops along the frontier as a “tripwire,” similar to existing NATO deployments in the Baltic states and Poland. He stressed that such moves would require coordinated international efforts.
Russia has consistently warned against Western intervention in Ukraine, with Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov describing NATO involvement as a provocation that could escalate the conflict. Russian forces have recently intensified their offensive, pushing Ukrainian troops back in the northeastern regions of Kharkov and Sumy.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky continues to demand that Western allies step up their support for Kiev. He criticized the international community’s fear of escalation, claiming that the ongoing loss of Ukrainian lives is itself a form of escalation.
show less
The French-led campaign for deeper NATO involvement inside Ukrainian borders is gaining traction among European allies, according to a spokesperson for President Emmanuel Macron's political party. The proposal includes deploying NATO forces in Ukraine in non-combat roles to counter Russian aggression.
show more
Republicans are advancing the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, a bill that would mandate proof of citizenship for voting, citing concerns over illegal voting by noncitizens despite opposition from Democrats. The Associated Press (AP) has acknowledged instances of foreign nationals illegally registering and voting. However, it insists that the SAVE Act is not necessary.
AP reporter Ali Swenson states that “the specter of immigrants voting illegally in the U.S. has erupted into a leading election-year talking point for Republicans.” Although Swenson concedes that there have been incidents of noncitizens registering and voting illegally, she argues that federal law already prohibits noncitizens from voting in federal elections and suggests that cases of illegal voting by noncitizens are not occurring in significant numbers. She also insists that states already have measures to counteract such actions.
Critics of the current system, however, note that the federal government does not require documentary proof of citizenship for voter registration. Federal voter registration forms only require individuals to affirm their citizenship by checking a box, effectively making the process reliant on the honor system.
Democrats oppose the SAVE Act, arguing that additional ID requirements could disenfranchise eligible voters who might not have immediate access to documents such as birth certificates or Social Security cards. Swenson cited a left-leaning activist who contended that IDs like Social Security numbers or driver’s licenses already entail proof of citizenship. Proponents of the SAVE Act argue that if such IDs already reflect citizenship status, requiring them should not constitute disenfranchisement.
Earlier this month, the National Pulse reported that not only are illegal aliens voting, but they are also three times more likely to vote for Democrats.
show less
Republicans are advancing the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, a bill that would mandate proof of citizenship for voting, citing concerns over illegal voting by noncitizens despite opposition from Democrats. The Associated Press (AP) has acknowledged instances of foreign nationals illegally registering and voting. However, it insists that the SAVE Act is not necessary.
show more
Editor’s Notes
Behind-the-scenes political intrigue exclusively for Pulse+ subscribers.
A new study suggests that vast amounts of internet content are disappearing, challenging the common perception of the web as a permanent repository of information. The research, published by the Pew Research Center, indicates that significant swathes of web pages and online content have been lost over the past decade.
According to the study, 38 percent of the web pages that existed in 2013 are no longer available. Even more recent content is prone to disappear; eight percent of pages from 2023 are already inaccessible. This trend occurs mainly when pages are deleted or moved within otherwise operational websites rather than when entire websites go offline.
The loss of content has affected various sectors, including news and government sites. Notably, 23 percent of news pages analyzed contain at least one broken link, and 21 percent of government domains show similar issues. Wikipedia, a widely used reference website, also suffers from this problem, with 54 percent of its pages having at least one dead link in their reference sections.
The vanishing content is not confined to web pages alone; social media platforms are also affected. The study found that approximately 20 percent of tweets disappear from the platform within a few months of being posted.
Researchers compiled their findings by examining nearly a million web pages using Common Crawl, a service that archives significant portions of the internet. They then tracked the availability of these pages from 2013 to 2023. Their analysis revealed that 25 percent of archived pages within that timeframe are no longer accessible. Of these, 16 percent originated from existing websites, while 9 percent came from websites that are now defunct.
show less
A new study suggests that vast amounts of internet content are disappearing, challenging the common perception of the web as a permanent repository of information. The research, published by the Pew Research Center, indicates that significant swathes of web pages and online content have been lost over the past decade.
show more
A group of Youngstown residents has filed a lawsuit seeking to delay the certification of results for the June 11 special election for Ohio’s 6th Congressional District. Reverend Kenneth Simon, along with two other local residents, claims that the current district lines are racist and dilute both black and Democratic votes.
“We can’t get anyone elected; the African American vote is so diluted, the democratic vote is so diluted,” Simon said. The congressional district, which was redrawn in 2022, now includes Mahoning County and other predominantly white counties. The group argues that this redistricting decision has unfairly skewed the electoral landscape in favor of the GOP. They highlight that predominantly black cities like Warren and Youngstown have been divided by the new boundaries.
Republican Michael Rulli and Democrat Michael Kripchak are the candidates vying for the congressional seat. Kripchak has publicly criticized the current election schedule, suggesting it was strategically designed to benefit the GOP. “This is Ohio, where Republicans have historically manipulated the system to maintain their advantage whenever fair competition poses a threat to their power,” Kripchak stated. Senator Rulli did not respond to requests for comment.
The lawsuit filed by Simon’s group demands that a non-partisan citizen committee be tasked with redrawing the district lines before the June election. The existing district, which will remain unchanged until 2026, encompasses Mahoning, Stark, Columbiana, Carroll, Tuscarawas, Jefferson, Harrison, Belmont, Monroe, Noble, and Washington counties.
Ohio’s 6th Congressional District was formerly represented by Republican Rep. Bill Johnson until he resigned in January 2024. The vacancy threatens the GOP’s already slim control of Congress, and a Democrat victory in the district could have significant implications for the 2024 presidential election.
show less
A group of Youngstown residents has filed a lawsuit seeking to delay the certification of results for the June 11 special election for Ohio’s 6th Congressional District. Reverend Kenneth Simon, along with two other local residents, claims that the current district lines are racist and dilute both black and Democratic votes.
show more
Shares of BuzzFeed Inc. experienced a significant rise early Wednesday following an announcement that former U.S. presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy has acquired a stake in the online media company and seeks to initiate discussions with its board. Ramaswamy, who ended his political campaign in January and subsequently endorsed Donald Trump, has taken a 7.7 percent stake in BuzzFeed valued at approximately $6.81 million.
The newly acquired position catapults Ramaswamy to the fourth largest shareholder in BuzzFeed, behind major investors such as Comcast, NEA Management, and Hearst Communications. These entities had previously invested in the company when its valuation was significantly higher.
In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Ramaswamy indicated his intent to “engage in a dialogue with board or management about numerous operational and strategic opportunities to maximize shareholder value, including a shift in the company’s strategy.” Following this disclosure, BuzzFeed shares surged by as much as 55 percent to $3.94 in premarket trading in New York, marking the most substantial one-day gain since February.
BuzzFeed, once well-known for publishing the fake Russiagate dossier on Donald Trump, recently refocused on generating online quizzes, listicles, and AI-generated pop culture content. The company has been struggling in recent years due to a decline in internet advertising revenue, leading to the elimination of its news division last year amid broader layoffs.
Ramaswamy, the founder of Roivant Sciences and co-founder of Strive Asset Management, stepped away from the asset management firm last year to concentrate on his presidential bid. He has since indicated that he does not plan to return to the firm, suggesting his new focus might be transitioning into the media industry.
show less
Shares of BuzzFeed Inc. experienced a significant rise early Wednesday following an announcement that former U.S. presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy has acquired a stake in the online media company and seeks to initiate discussions with its board. Ramaswamy, who ended his political campaign in January and subsequently endorsed Donald Trump, has taken a 7.7 percent stake in BuzzFeed valued at approximately $6.81 million.
show more
Arizona Republicans are eyeing a ballot measure aimed at making illegalimmigration unlawful under state law. State Republican leaders hope the move will galvanize their base ahead of the November elections. Arizona Democrats, meanwhile, are pushing a ballot measure that would expand abortion rights in the state with the same aim of boosting their party base’s turnout.
The state Senate is expected to vote Wednesday on the proposal, which has already cleared the House and must secure the support of all 16 GOP senators to advance to the ballot. Inspired by Texas‘ SB 4 and Arizona’s own 2010 SB 1070, the measure, however, faces some opposition from within the Republican Party.
An amendment addressing Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program recipients has divided GOP senators. State Sen. Ken Bennett (R) has voiced opposition due to its implications for DACA recipients, raising uncertainty about whether the Republicans have the necessary votes for passage.
If the measure advances, it could serve as a focal point to motivate Republican voter turnout, similar to how the anticipated ballot amendment on abortion rights is expected to energize Democratic voters. Republican political consultant Chuck Coughlin emphasized the strategic intent to tap into public frustration over immigration to drive dissatisfied voters to the polls. Democrats in the state legislature, however, are blasting the move.
“Republicans know they are losing on abortion, so they decided to at the last minute change the rules to put this incredibly egregious anti-immigrant ballot measure up for a vote to be sent to the voters,” state Representative Analise Hernandez (D) said in a post on the Chinese–controlled social media app, TikTok.
show less
Arizona Republicans are eyeing a ballot measure aimed at making illegalimmigration unlawful under state law. State Republican leaders hope the move will galvanize their base ahead of the November elections. Arizona Democrats, meanwhile, are pushing a ballot measure that would expand abortion rights in the state with the same aim of boosting their party base's turnout.
show more
English courts may no longer require courtroom lawyers to wear the traditional horsehair and, occasionally, hemp wigs they have donned since the 17th century to appease black barristers who complain the time-honored tradition amounts to “hair discrimination.”
“Following questions from barristers about wigs and hair discrimination, the Bar Council set up a working group to consider court dress in the context of all protected characteristics,” said a spokesman for the Bar Council, the approved regulator of barristers — specialists in courtroom representation within the English legal system.
Black barrister Michael Etienne sparked a miniature controversy after being instructed to wear a wig for a trial in 2022, as he sports an afro hairstyle, claiming the tradition was racist.
Despite ceremonial dress being highly valued in many African and indigenous traditional settings, black barrister Leslie Thomas KC insists England’s traditional wigs, or perukes, “certainly should go.”
“There isn’t any place in a modern society for barristers to be wearing 17th-century fashion,” he claimed, adding that win collars and other “archaic” court dress should also be scrapped.
ERASING ENGLISH CULTURE.
Leftist activists have been gradually erasing traditional English dress for some years. Speakers of the House of Commons traditionally wore wigs, black stockings, and silver-buckled shoes until Labour politician Michael Martin — later forced from the speakership by an expenses scandal — scrapped the tradition in 2000.
Wigs were dropped by the civil and familycourts in 2007 and were kept out of the Supreme Court established by Tony Blair in 2009. They currently survive only in criminal court.
Other traditions have also been dropped in the name of accommodating minorities, such as saying grace before meals at the Honourable Society of Lincoln’s Inn, one of four Inns of Court to which all English barristers must belong. The Inn dropped the 600-year-old tradition in favor of saying “a non-Christian ‘thanks’ because of our diverse range of members with a different range of beliefs.”
show less
English courts may no longer require courtroom lawyers to wear the traditional horsehair and, occasionally, hemp wigs they have donned since the 17th century to appease black barristers who complain the time-honored tradition amounts to "hair discrimination."
show more
Former Federal Election Commission (FEC) Commissioner Bradley Smith has revealed what he would have told the jury in former President Donald J. Trump‘s hush money trial if Democrat-aligned JudgeJuanMerchan had allowed him to testify.
Smith, a Harvard-educated campaign finance lawyer, was slated to address claims made by District Attorney Alvin Bragg‘s prosecutors that the former President had violated campaign finance law. However, before testifying, Judge Merchan severely limited the scope of Smith’s testimony — allowing him to essentially only address the history of the commission and a handful of legal definitions.
SMITH VERSUS MERCHAN.
“Judges instruct the juries on the law, and they don’t want a battle of competing experts saying here’s what the law is,” Smith said in an interview with the Washington Examiner. He added: “They feel it’s their province to make that determination. The problem, of course, is that campaign finance law is extremely complex, and just reading the statute to people isn’t really going to help them very much.”
Addressing District Attorney Alvin Bragg‘s dubious claims regarding federal election law, Smith said he would have “[laid] out the ways the law has been interpreted in ways that might not be obvious.”
A COMPLICATED LAW.
“You read the law, and it says that anything intended for the purpose of influencing an election is a contribution or an expenditure,” Smith explained, adding: “But that’s not, in fact, the entirety of the law. There is the obscure, and separate from the definitional part, idea of personal use, which is a separate part of the law that says you can’t divert campaign funds to personal use.”
Based on federal law, Smith said: “I can tell you my personal belief is that clearly paying hush money, or paying for a nondisclosure agreement, does not constitute a campaign expense.”
show less
Former Federal Election Commission (FEC) Commissioner Bradley Smith has revealed what he would have told the jury in former President Donald J. Trump's hush money trial if Democrat-aligned JudgeJuanMerchan had allowed him to testify.
show more
The sixteenth day of former President Donald J. Trump‘s Manhattan-based hush money trial ended well before noon as defense witness Robert Costello‘s cross-examination by prosecutors concluded, and the defense rested their case after a brief redirect. While Costello’s testimony lacked the fireworks seen Monday afternoon — where JudgeJuanMerchan cleared the entire courtroom at one point — the former legal adviser to Michael Cohen delivered a few parting blows to his former client’s claims.
Following Costello’s testimony, representatives for the prosecution and defense met in conference with Judge Merchan for a lengthy debate on what instructions the jury would receive ahead of their deliberations.
COSTELLO PART II.
Costello’s cross-examination by prosecutor Susan Hoffinger continued Tuesday morning. Kicking off her questioning, Hoffinger pressed Costello on whether disgraced lawyer Michael Cohen ultimately retained his law firm. The former federal prosecutor and defense attorney acknowledged that Cohen eventually hired a different firm to represent him.
Hoffinger showed the jury a 2018 email in which Cohen asked Costello to stop contacting him. It read: “Gentleman, Please cease contacting me as you do not and have never represented me in this or any other matter. Your interest and offers to become part of the team and to serve as a contact was subject to existing counsel, Guy Petrillo (cc’d) approval, which was denied.”
COSTELLO AND GIULIANI.
Pressing on, Hoffinger zeroed in on the 2018 Regency Hotel meeting between Michael Cohen and Robert Costello. Cohen previously testified that Costello had asked him during that meeting how he was connected with former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani.
“That’s not true,” Costello replied to Hoffinger. He added that Cohen‘s relationship with Giuliani did come up at a later meeting between the two. Hoffinger went on to confirm with Costello that Giuliani was a guest at his wedding.
The prosecution next presented Costello and the jury with an email on April 19, 2018, in which Costello informed Cohen that Giuliani was joining the Trump legal team. “I am sure you saw the news that Rudy is joining the Trump legal team. I told you my relationship with Rudy which could be very very useful for you,” he wrote to Cohen. Hoffinger also produced an email between Costello and Jeff Citron, where the former wrote: “All the more reason for Cohen to hire me because of my connection to Giuliani, which I mentioned to him in our meeting.”
Costello acknowledged he authored both emails.
MERCHAN’S RULING SNAGS COSTELLO.
Yesterday, Judge Merchan ruled that Robert Costello’s testimony would be limited to rebutting two specific claims made by Michael Cohen and that further elaboration was out of the scope of the trial. The dubious ruling prevented Costello from going into detail regarding his communications with Cohen, allowing prosecutors to undermine Cohen‘s former legal adviser to a degree on Tuesday.
Hoffinger presented Costello with another email in which the latter refers to a “backchannel.” She asked him if he pushed to represent Cohen to serve as a backchannel between the disgraced attorney and former President Donald Trump. Costello denied the accusation.
“That was your email to Michael Cohen?” Hoffinger asked, with Costello replying, “Yes.” Pushing further, the prosecutor asked Costello: “The email speaks for itself, right sir?”
Sensing an opportunity to trip up the prosecution and widen the scope of his testimony, Costello replied, “No, not quite. There are circumstances about that email which I would be delighted to tell you.”
Unfortunately, Hoffinger quickly responded, “That’s alright; let’s move on to the next one.” The exchange earned laughs in the courtroom.
AN EMAIL PROBLEM?
The prosecution continued to hammer at Costello using a series of 2018 emails he sent regarding the possibility of representing Cohen. In a May 15, 2018, email presented by Hoffinger, Costello wrote: “Our issue is to get Cohen on the right page without giving him the appearance that we are following instruction from Giuliani or the president. In my opinion, this is the clear correct strategy.”
Pressed as to the meaning of the email, Costello replied, “No, not to follow instructions but to get everybody on the same page because Michael Cohen had been complaining incessantly that Rudy Giuliani was making statements in the press.”
Next, Hoffinger presented an email authored by Costello on June 13, 2018. “Since you jumped off the phone rather abruptly, I did not get a chance to tell you that my friend has communicated to me that he is meeting with his client this evening, and he added that if there was anything you wanted to convey, you should tell me, and my friend will bring it up for discussion this evening,” he wrote at the time.
“I was encouraging Michael Cohen, as I just explained to you in my previous answer, to express any of his complaints, and he had several, so that I could bring them to Giuliani, and get them worked out, whatever they were,” Costello explained to Hoffinger regarding the email’s contents.
After a few more moments discussing the emails and Costello’s rocky relationship with Michael Cohen, the prosecution ended the witness’s cross-examination.
A BRIEF REDIRECT.
Former President Trump‘s defense attorney Emil Bove engaged in a brief redirect with Costello on the stand. He asked Cohen’s former legal adviser, “Who first used the word backchannel?” Costello told Bove that Giuliani first used the term.
Circling back to the June 13, 2018 email, Bove asked Costello whether he thought he was pressuring Cohen. Bove specifically highlighted a line in the email reading: “You have the ability to make that communication when you want to. Whether you exercise that ability is totally up to you.”
“Was that pressuring Michael Cohen to do anything?” Bove asked. Costello replied: “No, not at all.”
“Did you ever pressure Michael Cohen to do anything?” Bove followed up. Costello responded: “I did not.”
Former President Donald Trump‘s defense team rested after presenting a two-hour case on Monday and Tuesday.
SUMMATION AND DELIBERATION.
After Trump’s defense team rested their case, Judge Merchan dismissed the jury for an entire week. The judge told jurors and counsel that summations — also known as closing arguments — would occur on Tuesday, following the holiday weekend. The jury — barring a dismissal of the case by Merchan — is expected to begin deliberations as early as next Wednesday.
“I’ve considered all the permutation… at the end of the day, I think the best thing that we can do is to adjourn now until next Tuesday,” Merchan said. He continued: “At that time, you will hear summations from the attorneys. Probably Wednesday I’ll ask you to come in … hear jury charge and then I would expect that you will begin your deliberations hopefully at some point on Wednesday.”
JURY INSTRUCTIONS.
Following a lengthy break, counsel for the prosecution and defense returned to the courtroom at 2:15PM for a jury instruction conference with Judge Merchan. Trump‘s defense attorney Emil Bove asked Merchan to include an instruction that any campaign finance violation must be “willful” in nature. He argued that omitting the instruction “would allow the jury to think about the predicate offense in civil terms.”
Matthew Colangelo, representing the precaution, countered: “The plain text of the statute provides that the election law conspiracy occurs when its intended results are executed through unlawful means. There’s no need to add the word willful.”
He added: “The other crime here is the election law violation, which becomes a criminal violation when two or more persons conspire to promote” a candidate for election by unlawful means.”
Judge Merchan, interjecting, noted that the charge of falsifying business records in the first degree “requires that there be an intent to defraud that includes the intent to commit another crime.” While Merchan did not rule immediately on the issue, he did appear inclined to agree with the defense.
Regarding whether the National Enquirer did publish articles and promote Karen McDougal as part of her agreement with them, Judge Merchan sided with the defense and included language about the tabloid’s “legitimate press function.”
CLARIFYING COHEN’S CRIMES.
In another win for Trump‘s defense, Judge Merchan agreed with the former President’s attorneys to strike proposed language from the prosecution that stated Cohen “participated in and was convicted of two crimes.” Instead, the instructions will read that Cohen “participated in crimes.” Removing the reference to “convicted” was important to the Trump team as they did not wish the former President to be implicated in Cohen’s 2018 conviction for tax fraud.
Judge Merchan also appeared inclined to side with the defense regarding language referring to the falsified business records. Specifically, Bove asked Merchan to strike the phrase “a person causes a false entry when…”.
“They could convict based on someone else causing a false entry and accessorial liability — basically causing the causer — where (for example, if) Allen Weisselberg caused someone to do something and then President Trump caused Allen Weisselberg,” Bove contended. He added: “It doubles up on accessorial liability.”
In addition, the defense pushed Merchan to use an expanded instruction on intent. Bove noted, that there is a “significant issue with instructing to the jury that intent to defraud could include defrauding the government and the voting public, based on the facts of this case.” While Merchan did not immediately rule, he appeared inclined to find a middle ground between the proposed defense and prosecution language.
Judge Merchan did rule against the defense’s request that jurors be instructed that hush money payments are not illegal. “I think that to take it to the next level and actually give an instruction to the bench is taking it too far. I don’t think it’s necessary,” he said.
You can read The National Pulse’s Day Fifteen trial coverage here, and if you find our work worthwhile, consider joining as a supporter.
show less
The sixteenth day of former President Donald J. Trump's Manhattan-based hush money trial ended well before noon as defense witness Robert Costello's cross-examination by prosecutors concluded, and the defense rested their case after a brief redirect. While Costello's testimony lacked the fireworks seen Monday afternoon — where JudgeJuanMerchan cleared the entire courtroom at one point — the former legal adviser to Michael Cohen delivered a few parting blows to his former client's claims.
show more
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.
