From UN hopeful to House lifeline: Trump’s last-minute Stefanik switch explained



Shortly following his historic election victory last November, President Trump nominated loyal ally Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. Of all his nominations, Stefanik faced the least opposition in her Senate confirmation hearing — even walking away with some Democrat support.

Last week, however, Trump pulled her nomination, citing fear that Stefanik’s House seat would be replaced by a Democrat in a special election. Granted the GOP holds a razor-thin House majority (218-213) after January 2025 vacancies, losing her vote could very well jeopardize his legislative agenda.

“Is this the right move from the Trump administration?” Jill Savage, host of “Blaze News Tonight,” asks Blaze Media senior politics editor and Washington correspondent Christopher Bedford.

Bedford’s answer is a resounding yes.

Ambassador for the United Nations is “kind of a pointless job,” he says. “The whole point of the United Nations in New York is just so we can get foreign diplomats and leaders liquored up, hookered up, and on tape and video, and then go back to them later and say, 'Hey, we need a favor because we saw you with six prostitutes in your hotel room and a pile of coke, and your wife wouldn't want to see that.’"

Even still, he feels bad for Stefanik. The position is certainly “a stepping stone” and “a cool thing on your resume.”

However, what’s far more important is the GOP’s House majority, and where the numbers currently stand, Trump can’t afford to lose Stefanik’s vote — especially with wild cards like Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Chip Roy (R-Texas) in the House.

“It just comes down to the reality of giving the Republicans more breathing room particularly for this upcoming budget battle, which is expected in the next few weeks,” says Bedford.

“So who gets [the position] now?” asks Blaze News editor in chief Matthew Peterson.

“Maybe Ron DeSantis — you know someone who is not necessarily a Trump ally, but it'd be good to get them on the team but at the same time kind of sideline them a little bit,” says Bedford.

To hear more of the conversation, including Bedford’s predictions on the upcoming budget bill, watch the clip above.

Want more from 'Blaze News Tonight'?

To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Satanic Grotto poised to hold ‘Black Mass’ and dedicate Kansas legislature to Satan



“The slow seeping of secularism into our government in the name of tolerance” is a cancer in this country, says Blaze News senior politics editor and Washington correspondent Christopher Bedford.

Like actual cancer that attacks healthy cells, secularism “is waging open warfare on the religion that underpins our entire civilization,” which is Christianity.

If it wins, the future of America looks dark.

Someone who’s been exploring this issue in depth is John Daniel Davidson, senior editor of the Federalist.

Davidson recently joined Bedford on “Blaze News Tonight” to share his thoughts on the sickness that’s threatening to destroy the fabric of America.

“The future of a post-Christian America is not going to be this liberal utopia where we all kind of live and let live and we have like a libertarian kumbaya,” says Davidson. “In the absence of the Christian religion being sort of the basis of our society, the basis of our civic culture and our government and our public morality, something else is going to replace that, some other religion, and what I argue is that it'll be a resurgence of paganism.”

There’s already ample evidence that Davidson’s theory is right. Satanic groups are cropping up all over the country.

Bedford points to a Kansas-based group called the Satanic Grotto that is planning to hold a “Black Mass” on March 28 at the Kansas Capitol in Topeka in the name of the First Amendment. According to the event’s Facebook page, the gathering aims to “dedicate the grounds and our legislature to the glory of Satan.” The event apparently will include a Bible-burning and a cross-burning, as well as a mockery of the Catholic Eucharist.

“I think a proper understanding of what America is and where we come from would have to recognize that freedom of religion, like freedom of speech, has its limits, and the founders who instituted freedom of religion never imagined that it would be used as a pretext to attack what they would have called true religion or legitimate religion,” says Davidson.

All of the things that we associate with the American way of life — freedom of speech, freedom of religion, tolerance, consent of the governed, the rule of law, individual rights, the equality of people before the law — “come from Christianity.”

“If you get rid of Christianity, all those things are going to go too,” says Davidson. “It's not going to be the kind of country that you want to live in whether or not you're a Christian.”

Bedford agrees and wonders if this Satanic Grotto as well as the various “after-school Satan clubs” popping up in public education across the country are mostly composed of “useful idiots” pushing a radical leftist agenda or if they really are seeking to destroy Christianity.

Many satanic groups claim that Satan is just a symbol for their social justice causes and not an actual deity they worship.

Davidson, however, says that’s not always the case.

“I think a lot of them are useful idiots, as is often the case, but the ones who are driving it — the radicals, the ideologues, the people who are out here on the front lines trying to stage a Black Mass here in Kansas … they are attacking Christianity, and they're not attacking Christianity because they're radical atheists and secularists. They are people who increasingly do believe in the spiritual world; they do believe in an enchanted cosmos.”

These individuals, he says, “just hate Christianity, and that's why they attack it relentlessly.”

To hear more of the conversation, watch the clip above.

Want more from 'Blaze News Tonight'?

To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

USAID official goes rogue — orders BURNING of key documents



It appears Politico has committed what “Blaze News Tonight’s” Jill Savage calls “a random act of journalism.”

In a recent article titled “USAID official tells staffers: Shred and burn your documents,” the outlet spread the word that USAID senior official Erica Carr instructed staffers to destroy documents, many of which contain sensitive information.

According to Politico’s report, Carr’s email included the line: “Shred as many documents first, and reserve the burn bags for when the shredder becomes unavailable or needs a break.”

“Now, I'm not a legal expert, but I don't think this is how you're supposed to be doing things right now,” says Jill.

“My understanding is that if you're issuing orders like that, then you're putting yourself in grave legal jeopardy,” said Blaze News senior politics editor and Washington correspondent Christopher Bedford. “A forensic investigator will be able to find a lot of these documents, and then you've got the worst of both worlds ... the cover-up” and “the original documents themselves.”

“Who are they working with? What are they trying to cover up?” he asks.

Blaze News editor in chief and “Blaze News Tonight” co-host Matthew Peterson hopes to see “lots of action” when it comes to this mass shredding effort at USAID.

To hear more about the scandal, watch the episode above.

Want more from 'Blaze News Tonight'?

To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Dems' behavior at Trump's speech means one thing: Coexistence is OFF the table



The ideological divide that separates conservatives and liberals has grown into a gaping chasm, especially since the Obama administration. It seems that our differences are nearly irreconcilable at this point.

Never was this more obvious than last week, when the nation watched President Donald Trump give his first address to Congress since his historic return to the White House. No matter what he said or who he honored, the Democrats sat in stony, seething silence (except Rep. Al Green (D-Texas), who yelled and shook his cane). There was nothing but glares from the left, even when a child with cancer was honored by the Secret Service. Many held signs of opposition; others wore pink to protest Trump’s attack on “women’s rights.”

On the other side of the audience, Republicans whooped, applauded, and stood as President Trump shared the victories of the administration and reiterated what’s still to come.

This is where we’re at.

Is reconciliation even on the table at this point?

In his recent op-ed, Steve Deace, BlazeTV host of the “Steve Deace Show,” argued that Democrats’ reaction to President Trump’s speech made one thing clear: “We can’t share a country with these people.”

Now he joins “Blaze News Tonight” host Jill Savage and Blaze Media senior politics editor and Washington correspondent Christopher Bedford to explain why he believes the only answer is to “defeat” the left.

“Why can’t we coexist with the left?” asks Jill.

“Well, number one: They won’t coexist with us,” says Deace, noting that it was the Obama administration specifically that ushered in the era of “everyone who disagrees with me is a racist, misogynist, xenophobic, homophobic bigot.”

The scary part is that “they’re sincere” when they call us these names. “It’s not just a labeling tactic,” says Deace.

“I didn't want to admit it myself, because it would mean that politics in America has become a zero-sum game, and the minute it becomes a zero-sum game, now you're talking about cold civil war kind of stuff,” he adds.

Sadly, “it’s very clear that we are there now.”

“I like to describe it as a worldview steel-cage match, where two worldviews enter and only one is coming out,” says Deace.

The Democrats, he explains, have adopted a worldview in which “ideology matters more than people.”

“Whenever you get to a point in any human endeavor where the ideology matters more than what's best for human people, you have a cult, and I think that's essentially what [Democrats] are now,” says Deace. “We cannot share a culture together.”

Christopher Bedford says that he has long had a feeling we would come to this point. It started back when ISIS was brutally murdering Christians and President Obama, at a Christian prayer breakfast, said something to the effect of “get off [your] high horse about gay rights and gay marriage.”

“That’s when I realized they hate us. They really do hate us. It’s not just dialogue. They want to destroy us … and this guy was supposed to be the great unifier; this was supposed to be someone who would bring us all together, who would heal the racial sins of America's past and make it a great place, and he did the opposite,” he says, noting that Obama at least had the charisma to take diametrically opposed groups and form them into “a workable political coalition.”

But once his term ended, “the lunatics [began running] the asylum.”

Deace agrees. “Without that external packaging … the deal basically they're offering the American people is: Unless you are a fan of "The View" or MSNBC, we've got nothing for you, literally nothing … and in fact, we not only offer you nothing, we hate your guts.”

To hear more of the conversation, watch the clip above.

Want more from 'Blaze News Tonight'?

To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Meet the man behind Kash Patel’s confirmation



Last week, Kash Patel was confirmed as the director of the FBI by a majority in the Senate, despite being one of President Trump’s most controversial nominees.

But it wasn’t easy. In fact, it was a grueling process that took a ton of patience and strategy.

Besides perhaps Patel himself, nobody knows this better than Clint Brown, president of American Path, who played an integral role in the confirmation process.

Recently, Brown joined “Blaze News Tonight” host Jill Savage, Blaze News editor in chief Matthew Peterson, and Blaze News senior politics editor Christopher Bedford for an exclusive interview to explain the hoops Patel had to jump through and the heat he had to sustain in order to be confirmed.

“What is the story here? I mean, we went from [Patel’s confirmation] being an impossible thing” to it becoming “the symbol of an entirely unanimous, successful, overpowering period of confirmations,” said Peterson.

“There's two forces at play here,” said Brown.

One: “The American people are behind [President Trump].” No longer will they tolerate “the deep state coming after him, and Kash Patel is the symbol of fighting the deep state.”

Two: “It’s a new Senate. There’s new leadership in the Senate. They instituted some reforms as a body for how they were going to do business.”

“The Senate caught up with the country, which is kind of unbelievable. They realized there's a new sheriff in town and his name is Donald Trump,” Brown added.

Combined with those forces, however, was Kash Patel’s unyielding commitment to seeing the process through.

“We had to find every media clip that Kash had ever done and report it to the Senate Judiciary Committee,” said Brown, noting that they unearthed “1,600 clips in a matter of days.”

Further, “we hit 61 Senate meetings in a matter of weeks." Before Christmas alone, “we hit 40 meetings in two weeks, which is a ton of work, and Kash was just ready to go,” he continued. “The guy runs on jet fuel.”

These meetings, he said, generated “an early momentum” and ultimately “made a huge impact” in that they changed minds.

“Did you make headway in those meetings, where people who may have been 'no' votes became 'yes' votes?” Bedford asked.

“Absolutely,” said Brown.

“All the Republicans, even the ones who were skeptical, had an open mind because of those forces at play. They did not want to be on the wrong side of the American people on this.” The Democrats, of course, “didn’t have an open mind,” he explained.

Thankfully, in the end, Patel garnered enough support to be confirmed.

But that doesn’t mean it’s smooth sailing from here.

“This fight doesn't end, so what does the future look like here?” Jill asked.

To hear why Brown is confident that Patel will continue to triumph over the deep state, watch the clip above.

Want more from 'Blaze News Tonight'?

To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

NEW poll reveals Americans SUPPORT Elon Musk and DOGE. Will Dems continue with lawsuits despite the mandate?



Democrats are losing their minds as the Department of Government Efficiency continues to expose numerous federal agencies for wasting billions of taxpayer dollars.

Over the last few weeks, the department under Elon Musk has had its sights set on nearly a dozen government agencies, most notably USAID. On Monday this week, the talk shifted when the DOGE revealed that the U.S. Treasury spent up to $4.7 trillion in untraceable payments.

The Trump administration is doing exactly what it said it would do and exactly what the people elected it do — expose and eliminate wasteful government spending.

Democrats, however, calling the DOGE’s actions unconstitutional, have launched “a flurry of lawsuits,” says Jill Savage of “Blaze News Tonight.”

Recent polling indicates that the bureaucracy, as it struggles to survive, is unabashedly bucking the will of the people.

According to new polling data, “the majority of Americans approve of President Trump and Elon Musk, and more people approve than disapprove of DOGE,” says Jill.

In his latest Beltway Brief, Blaze News senior politics editor and Washington correspondent Christopher Bedford addressed this issue.

Now, he joins the “Blaze News Tonight” panel to explain why Democrats are clinging to these lawsuits despite Musk and the DOGE’s popularity.

Bedford says that Democrats are well-aware of the mandate, but they just don’t care.

“Democrat senators and Democrat pundits are coming out and saying, 'I know, I know, I've got the messaging memos'” indicating that “young people like this; old people like this” and that Americans at large “don't even comprehend how this could be a constitutional crisis,” says Bedford. Even still, “They don't want to listen to that.”

“They're still going to fight it,” he says.

Why?

Well, most obviously, “This is how they maintain power,” says Bedford.

However, to continue trudging down the path of “[defending] government waste” will likely backfire come midterm elections.

“You might actually see Republican gains in the midterms,” Bedford predicts.

To hear more of the conversation, watch the clip above.

Want more from 'Blaze News Tonight'?

To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Is Trump’s USAID freeze hurting American farms? Here’s the TRUTH.



In the wake of President Trump’s USAID freeze, the left is up in arms about all the alleged suffering taking place abroad as a result of cut funding. There are even complaints about the impact on U.S. farms that send food overseas.

“I've seen on left-wing Twitter and Instagram and other places increasing noise about how Trump's moves against USAID actually hit small farms, hit mid-range farms and American businesses,” says Blaze News senior politics editor and Washington correspondent Christopher Bedford.

Is it true that American farms and the recipients of the food they produce are suffering as a result of Trump’s USAID freeze?

To answer this question, Christopher speaks with his wife, Sarah Bedford — an expert on the history of USAID.

According to Sarah, on paper, these food programs, such as Food for Peace, appear to be “[addressing] food insecurity in impoverished nations.” This stated mission fuels the left’s narrative that “Trump's moves on USAID are hurting starving people who really need this help.”

However, the reality is that “if the intention is to deliver food aid in the most efficient manner possible to the people who need it the most, then no, these programs don’t work,” she says.

“They actually end up costing a lot more money than they would otherwise if USAID went into these local economies and bought the food assistance locally from local producers, stimulating the economies they're trying to help,” she explains. This localized aid would also spare the United States a fortune in “shipping costs” and “expensive American crops.”

Sarah points to the 2010 earthquake in Haiti as an example of how USAID “[suppresses] local markets.”

Because USAID “dumped surplus American crops” into the nation, “the economic recovery for Haiti was a lot more difficult,” she says.

However, this isn’t just the case when it comes to natural disasters. Many USAID programs actually hinder economic development in general because the goal is to get rid of surplus American crops, not to help stimulate and grow the economies of impoverished nations.

In fact, “food insecurity in some parts of the world has gotten worse since the U.S. started dumping surplus agricultural products abroad,” says Sarah, giving the example of a rice farmer who can’t “sell his wares at the local market” because he’s “being completely undercut by free American rice.”

Further, instead of just donating surplus crops, the U.S. government is now purchasing them “at prices that are arbitrary and that help special interests in the agricultural sector.”

The fact of the matter is that “economic development in some of these heavily agricultural economies is just not the goal of these [USAID] programs,” says Sarah.

As for the claim that Trump’s USAID freeze is hurting American Big Agriculture, Sarah says, it’s true.

“The USAID programs are great price supports for these companies, a lot of which are already enjoying USDA subsidies as well. So if the intention is for this USAID program to act as an agricultural subsidy, then it's doing great, but it's not supposed to be that. It's supposed to be efficiently delivered food aid,” she says.

On top of that, USAID is also how “the U.S. pedals soft power to increase U.S. influences in places where, if the U.S. were to withdraw its presence, Russia or China or another adversarial nation could come in and grow their influence in these developing nations,” adds Sarah, noting that “whether that's a good use of American taxpayer dollars” is up for debate.

“Donald Trump ran on and won on a promise to stop spending taxpayer money to chase these sort of nebulous foreign policy goals, so in a lot of ways what he's doing [with USAID] is consistent with that promise, as well as the promise to cut government spending,” she says.

To learn more, watch the clip above.

Want more from 'Blaze News Tonight'?

To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Why Mitch McConnell's last RINO stand vs. MAGA is doomed to fail



Is the GOP anti-Trump resistance on life support?

Blaze senior politics editor and Washington correspondent Christopher Bedford addressed this question in his latest Beltway Brief. Now, he joins Jill Savage on “Blaze News Tonight” to expound on why he thinks the GOP’s anti-Trump movement is on its way out.

“I think it's on its last legs, at least as far as its ability to create, to shape what goes on in the White House,” he says.

The best evidence that RINO power is waning can be seen in the failed attempts to sink several Trump nominees. Despite a vicious smear campaign, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was confirmed, albeit narrowly by Vice President JD Vance’s tie-breaking vote.

And even though RINOS “were unhappy with some aspects of RFK Jr.’s Make America Healthy Again agenda,” Kennedy scored enough votes from the Senate Finance Committee to advance to a full Senate vote. One of the votes that pushed him through came from Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Chair Bill Cassidy (R-La.), who, in the end, reversed his "no" due to enormous pressure from a very vocal MAHA movement, or perhaps because he “is up for re-election next year in Trump-loving Louisiana.” Either way, it’s a MAGA win.

Further, former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii), who they were “extremely against,” given that she is a “direct threat to deep-state intelligence community interests,” was also able to advance from committee when Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.) both confirmed their support.

RINOs, says Bedford, are realizing that “to step out of line [is] to face the most popular Republican president in generations and the majority of the American voters who actually put him there.”

If Kash Patel, President Trump’s nominee for FBI director, is confirmed, it will “signify the end of Senate GOP opposition to his chosen Cabinet and the beginning of a new Republican Party,” Bedford wrote in his op-ed.

“The only real threat to any of these nominees ... is Republicans and Republicans who promised to be a thorn in the side of MAGA,” he adds, but they “have basically been beaten at every single round by the Trump administration and by the people who push from the outside, the people who push from the inside, and honestly, a couple of good nominees.”

“They’re in full retreat,” he says.

To hear more of Bedford’s analysis, watch the clip above.

Want more from 'Blaze News Tonight'?

To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Introducing MAGA’s secret weapon to get Trump nominees CONFIRMED



Blaze Media senior politics editor Christopher Bedford describes the Article III Project as one of “the most aggressive Republican, conservative, MAGA organizations out there pushing confirmations and other different projects through Capitol Hill.”

Founded in 2019, the Article III Project was a bold response to the Gorsuch and Kavanaugh fights. Today, it’s working to fight back the swamp’s efforts to squash the confirmations of Trump’s nominees — especially his more controversial picks like Tulsi Gabbard, Kash Patel, RFK Jr., and Pete Hegseth, who thankfully was just confirmed as the next secretary of defense in spite of a nasty smear campaign aimed at disqualifying him.

With the upcoming hearings of Tulsi Gabbard, Kash Patel, and RFK Jr., a game plan is of the utmost importance to ensure Trump’s agenda is advanced.

Vice president of A3P Mark Lucas tells Bedford that the organization has a plan of action that targets soft Republicans, publicizes their stance, and forces them to vote for Trump’s picks during the confirmation hearings or face political ramifications.

There’s a reason Gabbard, Patel, Hegseth, and RFK Jr. are so controversial: They all want major reform, which makes them heroes to us but a threat to the establishment.

So how does A3P work to advance the will of the people despite the will of those in Washington?

When Hegseth and Patel’s nominations were considered to be “dead on arrival,” A3P took immediate action.

“We had certain Republican senators express a little concern, and they were quickly given an attitude adjustment due to our major media blitz,” says Lucas. “Mike Davis and I went on every outlet we could to defend them. We mobilized our grassroots army.”

Further, using A3P’s action center, citizens were able to flood the inboxes of their senators with “tens of thousands” of messages demanding the confirmation of Trump’s nominees. It’s already worked for Pete Hegseth.

For example, A3P was “instrumental in [knocking] the wind out of Senator Joni Ernst who was the most vocal, initially, against Hegseth,” says Bedford.

But there are still many confirmations to go. If we want to see Kash Patel, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and Tulsi Gabbard confirmed and Trump's agenda advanced, then we need to play our part. To learn more about A3P and how it’s working to get Trump’s nominees confirmed, watch the clip above.

Want more from 'Blaze News Tonight'?

To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Why we should root for AOC in her coup against Democrat House leadership



When Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) is in our headlines, it’s almost always for something negative. She is a far-left Hamas apologist who advocates for the rights of biological men to use women’s bathrooms and perpetuates the Trump-is-a-fascist narrative.

Despite her obvious flaws, AOC’s decision to challenge Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) for ranking member of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform might be a good thing, according to Blaze Media senior politics editor Christopher Bedford.

In his recent article, Bedford compared the two candidates. “AOC is a young firebrand and a household name” who “riles up the base,” while “Connolly is a white man in his mid-70s who is battling stomach cancer.”

Now he joins Jill Savage on “Blaze News Tonight” to explain why the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee is such an important role and why he believes AOC is preferable to Connolly.

“The ranking member of Oversight's job is to essentially investigate and oversee the executive branch,” says Bedford.

“It is an important role, and it's one that people can either use simply to raise their profile and make a lot of noise and to go on their cable channels … and rile up their base and raise money, or they can use it to be a little more studious, a little more serious, and really dig into and cause trouble for whoever is running the executive at that moment,” he explains.

AOC falls into the first category, while Connolly falls into the second, Bedford explains.

“If you want the least done, then you probably want Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in that position. She's very vocal; she jumps around; she dances at rallies,” he says. “She's someone who's a lot of bark but I would say less serious in the bite.”

Her “much more serious” opponent, on the other hand, “had spent 10 years in Senate Oversight as a staffer by the time [AOC] was born,” says Bedford. “If you're in the administration and you don't want the Democrats causing you too much trouble, you would not prefer [Connolly] to be the guy who's watching over you.”

On top of that, he’s also “backed by Nancy Pelosi.”

When it comes to the “Resistance 2.0,” Bedford would much prefer AOC’s “yelling to the base and throwing dance parties” to Connolly’s “more substantive investigations.”

To hear more of the conversation, watch the clip above.

Want more from 'Blaze News Tonight'?

To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.