Trump World Sources: Joni Ernst Is Waging ‘Aggressive’ Personal Jihad Against Hegseth

Ernst has repeatedly called Trump threatening him to dump Hegseth at the same time surrogates have told Trump to tap Ernst instead.

Mike Johnson fights back against radical gender ideology



I traveled around the country as an elite swimmer for more than a decade, and I could never have imagined a world where men would be welcomed into the female-only bathrooms and locker rooms I used. I instinctively knew that separate spaces were for my privacy and protection. But as I have shared my own story about having to compete against a grown man in the pool, I’ve seen how broken our nation’s understanding of sex is.

It's come so far that even organizations that were once “pro-woman” have completely rejected the basic understandings of woman and womanhood.

The gender ideology madness must stop, both for the protection and privacy of women and girls and for the long-term health of the rising generation.

Earlier this year the National Women’s Law Center, an organization supposedly founded by women to protect women, filed a brief opposing my suit against the NCAA on the grounds that “woman” should be redefined to include men.

When leading “pro-woman” organizations are engaged in a campaign of lies about basic physiology and anatomy — when they support men more than they support women — we need leaders who are bold. We need leaders who speak out and refuse to cave to critics.

Last week, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) did just that. He sent shock waves through the media for saying something so painfully obvious that it would have gone unnoticed even a few years ago. Johnson simply said: Men are men, women are women, men cannot become women. He understands that the government should protect men’s and women’s privacy, safety, and opportunity.

For nearly all of congressional history, this sentiment was so widely understood that it did not need articulating. But in our modern world, where traditional definitions of sex have been conflated with completely flexible and ever-changing understandings of “gender identity,” Speaker Johnson might as well have set off a grenade.

His comments were made as all newly elected members of Congress were beginning their orientation in Congress. One of those new members is Sarah McBride, a Delaware man who says he identifies as a woman.

I know Speaker Johnson, and he is a man of principle and faith. Just a few months ago, he hosted a panel regarding Title IX protections and invited me, former Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.), and Independent Women’s Forum Chairman Heather Higgins. He was clear about his positions and criticized the Biden administration’s efforts to change the definition of “sex” to include “gender identity” under Title IX.

Johnson once again showed leadership last week on the critical issue of protecting women. He used his authority over the Capitol’s facilities as speaker of the House to ensure single-sex facilities would remain separated by sex and to protect women-only spaces.

This is not an attack on Rep. McBride (D), as some in the media are suggesting. In fact, Johnson noted that McBride is a duly elected member of Congress who deserves to be treated with dignity as a human being and with the respect that comes with high public office.

But McBride is also a victim of the modern gender ideology that says men can become women and that tells individuals suffering from gender dysphoria that the issue lies with their bodies, not with their minds. The treatments offered to these people can end in sterility, loss of sexual function, and numerous other devastating and irreversible medical issues.

The Independent Women’s Forum has detailed the stories of many detransitioners who have had their bodies mutilated by doctors who told them to take puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones and have healthy body parts surgically removed. Many of these detransitioned men and women are now suffering from intense regret along with permanent physical damage, but as they have spoken out and tried to warn others, they have been excoriated by the same left-wing media and activist class that has been demonizing Johnson’s decision to stand with women.

The gender ideology madness must stop, both for the protection and privacy of women and girls and for the long-term health of the rising generation. Right now, all Americans who care about the future and safety of their daughters, or nieces, or sisters, or cousins have a responsibility to speak up and reject the lies of our modern age that call men women and women men. Mike Johnson is standing up for women everywhere by taking a stand to keep men out of women’s bathrooms in the House. I hope his actions inspire leaders across the country to do the same.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published by RealClearPolitics and made available via RealClearWire.

From Roosevelt to ruin: Social Security’s failed promises



Of all the deceptive sales techniques the U.S. government has used on the American people, one of them — the Social Security Act — gets far too little attention. Buckle up, because this is a wild ride.

In 1935, the American people were sold a bill of goods. They were told, “Pay into this system, and it’ll be your money for retirement.” Sounds great, doesn’t it?

The government promises you security but gives you dependency. It promises ownership but gives you a tax receipt.

But here’s where it gets juicy, in an ugly way. Two years later, when the Supreme Court was considering the constitutionality of the Social Security Act, the government did a complete 180.

The government — through Assistant Attorney General Robert Jackson — argued in essence, “Oh no, this isn’t your money at all. This is a tax, and we can do whatever we want with it.” Classic bait and switch.

Let’s not forget the ruling in Helvering v. Davis, where the Supreme Court upheld the Social Security Act by embracing the government’s argument and admission that what people pay into Social Security is tax revenue — available to be used as Congress may direct — and not at all money belonging to those who paid it.

To summarize: The proponents of the Social Security Act told American workers that what they paid into the system would remain their money, not the government’s — to get Congress to pass it — and then told the courts the exact opposite when defending the constitutionality of the law. The Supreme Court accepted the government’s argument, to the great detriment of the American people.

Now, let’s talk about what happens to “your money” once it’s in the government's hands. Spoiler alert: It’s not managed like your IRA or 401(k).

First, this money doesn’t sit in a nice, individual account with your name on it. No, it goes into a huge account called the “Social Security Trust Fund.” But here’s the kicker — the government routinely raids this fund. Yes, you heard that right. The government takes “your money” and uses it for whatever the current Congress deems “necessary.”

Every few years, there’s talk in Congress about “saving Social Security.” I’ve introduced and co-sponsored a number of measures over the years that would fix it. But most in Congress show little desire to fix it and are instead constantly looking for ways to “borrow” from it — with no plan to put it back.

And the returns? Forget about compound interest or stock market gains. Your “investment” in Social Security can give you a return lower than inflation.

If you had put the same amount into literally anything else — a mutual fund, real estate, even a savings account — you’d be better off by the time you reached retirement age, even if the government kept some of it!

Do the math: With Social Security, you’re looking at a return that's pathetic compared to market averages. It’s not even an investment. It’s a tax.

And let’s talk about how this system is set up to fail. The demographic shift? More retirees, fewer workers. It’s almost fair to compare it to a Ponzi scheme that’s running out of new investors. Every dollar you pay into Social Security, only to see it gobbled up by the government itself, is a dollar you can’t invest in your own future. It’s government dependency at its worst.

Remember, this isn’t just about retirement. It’s about independence, about controlling your own destiny. With Social Security, you control nothing.

The government promises you security but gives you dependency. It promises ownership but gives you a tax receipt.

And don’t get me started on the management. The Social Security Administration is a bureaucratic behemoth, not exactly known for its efficiency or innovation. If you think your money is safe there, you’re in for a rude awakening. The mismanagement, the waste, the deception — it’s all on display.

So what’s the solution? We need real, genuine reform. Within the Social Security system, Americans should be able to invest in their own future and not be shackled by the worst parts of this outdated, mismanaged system.

It’s time we acknowledge the truth: Social Security as it now exists isn’t a retirement plan; it’s a tax plan with retirement benefits as an afterthought. We were sold a dream but received a nightmare. It’s time for a wake-up call. We need real reform.

It’s time for Americans to know the true history of the Social Security Act. The more people learn the truth, the more they’ll start demanding answers, options, and real reform from Congress. Please help spread the word.

The history of the Social Security Act — which sadly must include the deceptive way it was sold to the American people — is yet another reason why America’s century-long era of progressive government must be brought to a close.

Editor’s note: A version of this article appeared originally as a post on X (formerly Twitter).

Why Trump Shouldn’t Use Recess Appointments To Force Through Cabinet Nominees

Recess appointments probably wouldn’t succeed in Congress and, even if they did, appear dead on arrival at the Supreme Court.

FACT CHECK: Did MTG Accuse Republican Congress Members Of Having Similar Accusations To Matt Gaetz’s?

A post shared on social media purports that Marjorie Taylor Greene said “if every member of Congress had to resign for doing what Matt Gaetz has been accused of, Democrats would have a supermajority.” Marjorie Taylor Greene : “if every member of Congress had to resign for doing what Matt Gaetz has been accused of, Democrats would […]

‘Sarah’ McBride Isn’t Just A Congressman In A Dress But A Trojan Horse To Force Men Into Women’s Spaces Everywhere

[rebelmouse-proxy-image https://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Screenshot-2024-11-21-at-5.03.19 PM-1200x675.png crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Screenshot-2024-11-21-at-5.03.19%5Cu202fPM-1200x675.png%22%7D" expand=1]McBride and his allies want women to give up privacy and safety, and all of us to give up our integrity and become complicit in their lies.

From feminism to ‘theminism’: Nancy Mace faces liberal fury in Congress



The opposition Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) has received from her progressive female colleagues in Congress is a clear sign that “theminism” is a far stronger political force than feminism.

Mace recently submitted a resolution to ban men from women’s restrooms in the U.S. Capitol. She did so because Tim McBride, who “identifies” as a woman called Sarah, was elected to Congress in November and will become Mace’s colleague in January.

The fact that liberals have become libertines and conservatives don’t know what they want to conserve is a sign of our culture’s spiritual sickness.

Mace has spent several days posting videos about her desire to protect women in their private spaces, including bathrooms and locker rooms. Unsurprisingly, progressive women don’t have her back.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) called her Republican colleague’s attempts to keep natal males out of the women’s bathroom “disgusting” and said she would put “girls of all kinds” in danger. Former “Today Show” host Katie Couric said she was “disappointed” that Mace was being “bigoted” toward McBride.

All of this comes at a time when Democrats, still reeling from their recent electoral drubbing, are doubling down on their support of radical gender ideology. Jen Psaki recently tried to minimize the issue of boys in girls’ sports on her show. John Oliver did the same on his show.

None of this should come as a surprise. Some of the most outspoken women in our culture on abortion rights, pay equity, climate change, and politics are now scared to speak about the very thing they have built their identity around: womanhood. They spent decades trying to smash the patriarchy only to submit to the men leading the “theytriarchy.”

The party that spent the last few months saying it would defend women is unwilling to define a “woman” publicly. The feminist movement has laid down its sword, raised the white flag of surrender, and bowed in submission to the handful of “impossible women” who are society’s latest oppressed group.

Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem are hailed as the matriarchs of the Second Wave feminist movement that sought to give women greater access to higher education and professional opportunities. But Shulamith Firestone, a radical feminist, was vocal about her desire to see sex itself abolished in her 1971 book “The Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution”:

And just as the end goal of socialist revolution was not only the elimination of the economic class privilege but of the economic class distinction itself, so the end goal of feminist revolution must be, unlike that of the first feminist movement, not just the elimination of male privilege but of the sex distinction itself: genital differences between human beings would no longer matter culturally.

Firestone died alone in her apartment in 2012 after years of living with schizophrenia, but she saw where the feminist movement was headed more than a half-century ago. The trans movement is a feature of her feminist utopia, but it’s a bug to women like Mace, who tout their “girl power” credentials and brag about supporting gay marriage.

This is one of the reasons we are here today. A hallmark of progressivism is the desire to reshape reality by controlling the dictionary. Liberals — in both parties — transformed the government’s definition of marriage from a union between one man and one woman to a contract between any two consenting adults. For now. They are attempting to do the same with sex by pushing the notion it’s possible to be a male “woman” or female “man.”

Only time will tell whether Republicans will develop the spine to see this battle all the way through. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) tried to dodge a direct question about McBride’s sex at a press conference before affirming the sex binary in a follow-up statement. Getting Jimmy off of Jane’s field hockey team is one thing. But forcing girls to refer to hulking teenage boys as “she” and “her” is a sign the roots of this twisted ideology are still firmly in place. The only thing that can withstand the current wave — and all the ones to come — is a renewed cultural mindset firmly rooted in biblical truth.

No other ideology can assure victory because this is ultimately not a partisan problem. The fact that liberals have become libertines and conservatives don’t know what they want to conserve is a sign of our culture’s spiritual sickness. It’s impossible to rebuild American families if we live in a society where people are confused about which sex has the babies.

The fact people are attacking Nancy Mace for her campaign to “Make Women Female Again” is a sign we’re continuing on our downward slide into madness. Only God can save us now. In the end, the choice is clear: We are either going to have Christ or chaos.

Want Better Republicans? Stop Sitting Out Primaries

The GOP establishment knows it can get away with betraying conservative priorities because Republican voters let them do it.

Matt Gaetz says he will not return to Congress



Former Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida announced Friday that he will not be returning to serve in the 119th Congress.

This announcement came after Gaetz withdrew his bid for attorney general just two weeks after President-elect Donald Trump nominated him for the position, which sparked controversy on Capitol Hill. Although Gaetz is eligible to serve the term to which he was re-elected, he mentioned in his resignation letter that he did not "intend" to return to the House and then confirmed that he will not return on Charlie Kirk's podcast.

“I’m still going to be in the fight, but it’s going to be from a new perch. I do not intend to join the 119th Congress,” Gaetz told Kirk.

Gaetz has spent several days alongside Vice President-elect JD Vance holding meetings with senators ahead of his confirmation. Gaetz withdrew following his time spent on the Senate side, saying his confirmation was "unfairly becoming a distraction" for the Trump transition team.

"There is no time to waste on a needlessly protracted Washington scuffle, thus I'll be withdrawing my name from consideration to serve as Attorney General," Gaetz said in a Thursday post on X.

Trump has since nominated former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi for the role.

Republicans now have only a narrow House majority, and the vacancy left by Gaetz has yet to be filled.

"There are a number of fantastic Floridians who’ve stepped up to run for my seat, people who have inspired with their heroism, with their public service," Gaetz told Kirk. "And I’m actually excited to see Northwest Florida go to new heights and have great representation."

Gaetz has not yet announced where he will continue his political career but vowed to remain a close ally to the president-elect.

“I’m going to be fighting for President Trump," Gaetz told Kirk. "I’m going to be doing whatever he asks of me, as I always have. But I think that eight years is probably enough time in the United States Congress.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Millions of small businesses risk ruin over a new mandate



Millions of small-business owners, including those running LLCs and S corporations, face looming financial penalties and even jail time due to the Corporate Transparency Act Beneficial Ownership Information rule, also known as CTA BOI. With the January 1 deadline approaching, Congress must act now by passing one of the proposed delay bills, or Donald Trump must pledge that his administration will not enforce fines for noncompliance.

What is the CTA BOI rule, and what’s the problem?

As Glenn Beck and I have discussed this past year, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, a division of the Treasury Department, issued the CTA BOI rule, which requires businesses to report personal information about all owners and decision-makers. This includes submitting a photo ID, such as a driver's license or passport, for each person. The stated goal of the rule is to combat cartels, terrorism, and money laundering. However, this reasoning is deeply flawed. Criminal organizations are unlikely to voluntarily register their businesses, leaving law-abiding small businesses to shoulder the compliance burden.

Large businesses are exempt from this rule, meaning small businesses and other entities, such as certain housing associations, bear the brunt of the regulation. The penalties for noncompliance are excessive, including daily fines exceeding $500 and potential jail time. Additionally, the rule requires businesses to submit sensitive personal data, creating a cybersecurity risk if hackers target the database.

Congress has failed to act decisively

Despite at least 10 pending lawsuits challenging the rule's constitutionality, including one where a federal district court declared it unconstitutional, Congress has not taken definitive action. Multiple delay bills have been introduced in both the House and Senate, yet none have moved forward. A recent report estimated compliance rates at just 10%, meaning millions of small businesses could face penalties under an unconstitutional rule.

Small-business owners are not financial criminals. They are the backbone of the American economy and deserve better treatment. This rule unfairly targets them, and Congress or President-elect Trump must take immediate action to protect these businesses.

What needs to happen?

Congress must pass a delay bill before the January 1 deadline. Alternatively, President-elect Trump could reassure small-business owners that his administration will not enforce the fines, giving them much-needed breathing room. This would allow time to overturn the rule entirely in 2025.

Last week, 44 members of Congress sent a letter to FinCEN requesting a delay, but more concrete action is necessary. Small businesses need clear communication and protection from this onerous regulation.

What can you do?

Call your representatives and spread the word on social media. Urge Congress and the Trump administration to take swift action. Small businesses need support, not unnecessary barriers, to thrive. Let’s prioritize empowering the American entrepreneurial spirit and protecting the backbone of our economy.