Trump Admin Uses Agency Websites To Troll Democrats Over Shutdown
'I am out of office for the foreseeable future'
State Department cuts ties with Armed Queers-affiliated NGO
The FBI has been investigating whether trans-activist groups and other radicals had foreknowledge of the Charlie Kirk assassination plot. A law enforcement source confirmed to the New York Post that one of the radical leftist groups that investigators have been looking at is Armed Queers Salt Lake City.
This scrutiny of Armed Queers has evidently rattled some cages, prompting the State Department to take decisive action.
The radical group
Armed Queers SLC is a radical socialist outfit that stated in its now-deleted Instagram group that it was a "revolutionary LGBTQ organization dedicated to the defense, and success" of supposedly oppressed peoples.
'We are taking aggressive action.'
A membership form for the socialist group identifies six principles, including "the armed and militant protection of queer and trans communities" and "trans liberation from the gender binary and biological essentialism."
The group told Voyage Utah in a July 2024 interview, "We have organized, educated, and agitated within LGBTQ, anti-imperialist, and labor movements towards a socialist future."
In addition to referring to training sessions in Cuba for its members "as a part of a yearly May Day Brigade," the group has shared various radical sentiments and quotations on social media in recent weeks.
For example, in a post titled "Black August," the group shared a quote from George L. Jackson, a Marxist thug who was convicted of armed robbery and accused of murdering a prison guard, that read, "Settle your quarrels, come together, understand the reality of our situation, understand that fascism is already here, that people are dying who could be saved, that generations more will live poor butchered half-lives if you fail to act. Do what must be done; discover your humanity and your love in revolution."
Following Kirk's assassination, allegedly by a leftist with a trans-identifying boyfriend, Armed Queers began scrubbing and deleting its social media profiles.
The radical
Ermiya Fanaeian is a male pretending to be a female who as of last year indicated that he was an "active organizer" of Armed Queers and a student at the University of Utah. Where Armed Queers is concerned, Fanaeian is, however, apparently far more than just an organizer.
The LGBT gun rights group Pink Pistols confirmed on Monday that Fanaeian — who was among the LGBT activists who supported Massachusetts Democrat Sen. Elizabeth Warren's presidential campaign in 2019 and at one point allegedly appeared on stage with the senator — was a University of Utah student who ran the Salt Lake City Pink Pistols chapter from 2020 to 2021.
"While initially welcomed, she began using the Pink Pistols name to promote broader political issues, violating our rule that we are a single-issue organization devoted solely to the safe, legal, and responsible use of firearms by the queer community," Pink Pistols said in a statement. "In 2021, her group and Pink Pistols parted ways, and she renamed her organization Armed Queers of Salt Lake City."
It turns out that Pink Pistols is not the only organization that has distanced itself from Fanaeian.
Blaze News has reached out to Sen. Warren's office for comment.
The NGO
Utah Global Diplomacy is an NGO that has hosted international exchange programs of the State Department to welcome foreign nationals to Utah for short-term professional and cultural experiences. The outfit is supposedly guided by the idea that citizens have a responsibility to "help shape U.S. foreign relations 'one hand-shake at a time.'"
The famous analyst DataRepublican highlighted on Monday that Fanaeian, who indicated in a now-deleted 2019 student profile that he was "originally from Iran," was recognized by the nonprofit organization Utah Global Diplomacy in September 2022 with its 7 for 17 award.
RELATED: Rubio puts visa holders who celebrated Charlie Kirk's death on high alert
Although Utah Global Diplomacy scrubbed the relevant award page and as of Wednesday had password-protected its entire site, an archived UGD page still refers to the radical's receipt of the award, as does an Aug. 25, 2022, post on Instagram.
The award "recognizes young Utahns working to achieve the United Nations 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) while exemplifying Utah Global Diplomacy’s core values of respect, social responsibility, and open dialogue," says an archived page. "Each 7 for 17 award winner must demonstrate a commitment to meeting one (or multiple) of the 17 United National Sustainable Development Goals through novel, innovative, or unique means."
The radical's bio on the archived award page states:
Ermiya Fanaeian is a Trans liberation and Feminist political organizer whose work has included organizing around the abortion struggle, working with the ACLU to secure the rights of Trans youth in the education system, organizing to criminalize conversion therapy in the state of Utah, working on electoral campaigns, and creating research studying the conditions of gender oppressed people at the hands of state institutions.
DataRepublican noted, "SLC Armed Queers is not 'adjacent' to the honor that Ermiya Fanaeian got from Utah Global Diplomacy. Utah Global Diplomacy specifically awarded her for her work with trans people, of which SLC Armed Queers is key. This may be why they scrubbed their pages."
Blaze News has reached out to Utah Global Diplomacy for comment.
The breakup
A State Department source confirmed to Blaze News that any ties to Utah Global Diplomacy, "which existed indirectly via an external implementor, are being completely severed and dismantled."
This could prove greatly consequential for the NGO, as the bulk of its funding takes the form of government grants.
"We are taking aggressive action to ensure that any implementor that has any relationship whatsoever with this radical organization is completely cut off from any State Department engagement," said the source.
Secretary Marco Rubio revealed this week that the State Department has also been revoking visas of individuals who have celebrated the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Vance makes one thing abundantly clear ahead of Trump's big ceasefire meeting with Putin
President Donald Trump made good on yet another campaign promise last week, brokering a historic peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan — two nations that have been spilling blood for decades over territory in the Caucasus Mountains.
Trump pulled off this latest deal after securing peaceful resolutions between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Cambodia and Thailand, and India and Pakistan. Trump, now on a roll, appears poised to bring an end to the war in Ukraine.
'We're done with the funding of the Ukraine war business. We want to bring about a peaceful settlement to this thing.'
To this end, Trump announced on Friday that he will meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Aug. 15. He told reporters the peace deal would likely involve "some swapping of territories to the betterment of both."
Hours after Trump's announcement, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy shared a video suggesting Kyiv would not make territorial concessions — a possible obstacle to a settlement.
After stating, "Ukrainians will not gift their land to the occupier," Zelenskyy said that "any decisions that are against us, any decisions that are made without Ukraine, are at the same time decisions against peace. They will not achieve anything. These are unworkable decisions."
Vice President JD Vance, who has previously made his frustration with Zelenskyy known, told Maria Bartiromo in a "Sunday Morning Futures" interview recorded on Friday that neither side will be particularly happy about the settlement, and that one way or another, "we're done with the funding of the Ukraine war business. We want to bring about a peaceful settlement to this thing."
RELATED: Trump makes good on MAJOR campaign promise, brokering a 'historic peace'
The United States has committed hundreds of billions of dollars to Ukraine since its invasion by Russia in February 2022, outspending Europe on propping up Kyiv well into this year.
In addition to taxpayer dollars for the beleaguered nation's humanitarian and budget support, the U.S. has poured well over $70 billion worth of weapons, equipment, and other military support into Ukraine — including long-range Army Tactical Missile System missiles.
Trump announced in July that the U.S. would supply Ukraine with "various pieces of very sophisticated military" equipment, including Patriot air defense batteries; however, European nations would foot the bill.
"We're in for about $350 billion. Europe is in for $100 billion. That's a lot of money, 100, but they should be in actually for more than us," Trump said. "So as we send equipment, they are going to reimburse us for that equipment."
— (@)
While American military aid is becoming increasingly mediated by European nations, Vance hinted in his interview with Bartiromo that Washington retains sufficient economic leverage over Kyiv to compel it to negotiate, even if the terms are at first blush unacceptable to Zelenskyy.
"The reason that we reached this decisive moment, a real change in where we were, is because the president was willing to apply some significant pressure and actually say, 'If you don't come to the table, the American people — we're not going to get involved in this war directly, but we have a lot of economic points of leverage and we're willing to use those to bring about peace.'"
'Americans are sick of continuing to send their money, their tax dollars to this particular conflict.'
Trump has applied pressure in both directions.
In an effort to get Putin to the negotiating table, Trump threatened last week to apply a 25% tariff on goods from importers of Russian oil. After observing in March that Zelenskyy was "not ready for Peace if America is involved," Trump ordered a brief pause on all military aid being sent to Ukraine.
Both foreign leaders appear to have reacted to Trump's diplomatic spurring.
Vance emphasized that the peace deal is "not going to make anybody super happy. Both the Russians and the Ukrainians, probably, at the end of the day, are going to be unhappy with it."
While the Ukrainians and Russians won't be happy, Vance hinted that there will be at least one major cohort pleased to see the fighting end, noting, "Americans are sick of continuing to send their money, their tax dollars to this particular conflict."
The vice president indicated that a trilateral summit is now in the cards but that it would not be productive to have Zelenskyy attend the Friday summit in Alaska.
Blaze News has reached out to the White House and to the State Department for comment.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!Why pro-life Americans can’t trust the courts any more
Americans love to blame politicians — and often with good reason. But the real power in this country doesn’t rest with the people we elect. It rests with the ones we don’t. Unelected judges now govern America. They don’t interpret laws. They rewrite them.
Activist judges have become the unelected elite now running our country, handing down rulings that override the will of voters, defy elected legislatures, and erase laws they don’t like.
One state is trying to protect life; the other is trying to shield those who end it. And a single judge gets to pick which law counts.
They employ manipulative language to justify their overreach. If you don’t comply, blood is on your hands. Whether it’s the environment, vaccine mandates, border control, or abortion access, the refrain is always the same: Submit to the ruling, or people will die.
The irony couldn’t be more blatant.
In many cases involving abortion policy, it is in fact judges’ rulings that cost lives — lives of the unborn babies impacted by their rogue, dangerous decisions.
Take the recent case in Tennessee, where a federal judge blocked a law that protected minors from being trafficked across state lines for secret abortions. The law didn’t punish women. It didn’t outlaw abortion. It simply required parental involvement, something the majority of Americans support. But for activist judges, parental rights are optional if abortion is the end goal.
In New York, another judge defied federal authority and openly refused to cooperate with Texas law enforcement to hold a doctor accountable for illegally prescribing abortion pills. One state is trying to protect life; the other is trying to shield those who end it. And a single judge gets to pick which law counts.
Meanwhile, a federal judge overturned efforts to defund Planned Parenthood nationwide, even after Congress passed clear budget restrictions. The elected branches — chosen by the people — made a decision. But it didn’t matter. The judge didn’t like it, so the ruling class overruled the people and prioritized its holy grail: abortion.
Judicial activism has turned the courts into abortion war rooms. Judges now see themselves not as interpreters of law but as defenders of an ideology that elevates abortion above the democratic process. Their rulings don’t reflect any laws. They reflect a commitment to abortion at any cost.
It’s not just dangerous. It’s undemocratic.
Thankfully, the Supreme Court is beginning to push back. In a recent ruling, the court clarified that district judges cannot issue nationwide injunctions and block federal policies. It’s a necessary and overdue correction. But it’s only the beginning.
RELATED: Judicial activism strikes again in 14th Amendment decision
The Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and gave power back to the people. In many states across the country, Americans responded by electing leaders and passing laws to protect the unborn. But today, activist judges are overriding those efforts, blocking pro-life laws and shielding abortionists from accountability.
We need judges who apply the law, not rewrite it. Until that happens, every unborn child, every woman in danger of being exploited by the abortion industry, and every citizen fighting for life will remain at the mercy of unelected rulers.
The Dobbs decision was only the beginning. Now we must press forward to ensure that the will of the people is honored and the most vulnerable among us are finally protected.
Here’s Why New Data Finds Continued Enrollment Slide For Public Schools
Most public schools are now failing in three critical areas that parents care about when deciding on their children’s K-12 education: academic rigor, student discipline, and the campus’ moral influence.After decades of promises, GOP finally defunds PBS and NPR
President Donald Trump is among the Republicans who have long sought to terminate federal funding for National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service, a pair of outfits whose unmistakable ideological bias and imbalanced coverage at taxpayers' expense have rankled conservatives. The call to defund the liberal networks goes back at least as far as the Nixon administration.
On May 1, Trump ordered the Corporation for Public Broadcasting to cut off the liberal propaganda networks' direct and indirect funding, noting both that "Americans have the right to expect that if their tax dollars fund public broadcasting at all, they fund only fair, accurate, unbiased, and nonpartisan news coverage" and that "no media outlet has a constitutional right to taxpayer subsidies."
The president's order was, however, vulnerable to legal challenges — especially since Congress holds the power of the purse.
To ensure the success and permanence of this defunding effort, the White House proposed that Congress cancel funding to public broadcasting for fiscal years 2026 and 2027. In addition to the proposed $1.1 billion in cuts to the CPB, the White House also requested that lawmakers cancel over $8 billion to various leftist projects disguised as foreign aid programs.
'Washington has a spending problem, and we have to start making cuts.'
House Republicans ultimately obliged the president, delivering most of his desired cuts late Thursday night. None of the Democrats' amendments were adopted. A promise to voters decades in the making was finally delivered.
In the run-up to the vote in the House of Representatives, an Office of Management and Budget official seized on the historic nature of the cuts. In a statement to Blaze News, the official said, "Conservatives have been calling to defund NPR and PBS for decades. President Trump delivered in six months. Not only that, this package cuts billions in wasteful foreign aid that has been spent on projects including $4 million for 'sedentary migrants' in Colombia, $643,000 for LGBTQI+ programs in the Western Balkans, $833,000 for 'transgender people, sex workers, and their clients and sexual networks' in Nepal, and many more."
— (@)
"The Trump administration is committed to putting America first and restoring fiscal sanity," continued the OMB official. "This recissions package is a huge step in the right direction."
Russ Vought, director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, told Steve Bannon's "War Room" on Thursday that the pending passage of the rescissions package and the defunding of the CPB in particular would be a "historic victory." After all, it is the first successful presidentially proposed rescissions package since fiscal year 1999.
RELATED: Vance casts tiebreaking vote to advance DOGE cuts after Republicans defy Trump
The U.S. Senate voted 51-48 on Trump's requested cuts in an early Thursday-morning vote just hours after Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) emphasized that "reining in waste, fraud, and abuse in the federal government is a priority shared by President Trump and by Senate Republicans."
Thune noted further when teeing up the rescissions package that it was a "small but important step toward fiscal sanity that we all should be able to agree is long overdue."
When asked ahead of the Senate vote whether lawmakers might water down the DOGE cuts, Florida Rep. Greg Steube (R) expressed hope to Blaze Media that Republicans would see it through, stressing that "Washington has a spending problem, and we have to start making cuts."
'Conservatives have been calling to defund NPR and PBS for decades. President Trump delivered in six months.'
Although the House already voted in favor of the cuts in a 214-212 vote last month — where Republican Reps. Mark Amodei of Nevada, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Nicole Malliotakis of New York, and Mike Turner of Ohio voted in opposition — the small changes made in the Senate still needed to be voted on by the House.
The package passed the House again by a narrow margin late Thursday night, this time of 216-213. Once again, both Fitzpatrick and Turner voted against passing the cuts.
Trump pledged to sign the package into law at the White House on Friday afternoon. "Congratulations to our GREAT REPUBLICANS for being able to accomplish so much, a record, in so short a period of time," he posted to Truth Social Friday morning.
RELATED: Sparing taxpayers from funding leftist propaganda
Trump's success — which has enraged Democratic lawmakers and NGOs — will have a major impact at NPR and PBS.
A spokesman for PBS, which has over 330 member television stations, indicated earlier this year that the organization receives 16% of its funding directly from the federal government each year.
While NPR claims that less than 1% of its annual operating budget comes in the form of grants directly from the CPB and other federal sources, the programming fees paid by CPB-funded public radio stations to NPR have been one of its primary sources of revenue.
Blaze News previously reported that consolidated financial statements show that the organization secured over $96.1 million in "core and other programming fees" in 2023, $93.2 million in 2022, $90.4 million in 2021, and $92.5 million in 2020.
That tap has now been turned off for at least two years.
Katherine Maher, president and CEO of NPR, said in a statement obtained by Blaze News after the Senate vote, "Public radio is a lifeline, connecting rural communities to the rest of the nation and providing lifesaving emergency broadcasting and weather alerts. It cannot be replaced, so it is essential that its funding be sustained."
Blaze News has reached out to PBS for comment.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Nonprofits aided the invasion — now they obstruct deportation
President Donald Trump’s return to office marked the beginning of the end of the Biden-Harris border crisis. On day one, Trump took swift action to shut down the lawless pipeline that brought millions of illegal aliens into the country over the past four years.
But the federal government didn’t act alone. It relied on help — and that help came from well-funded nonprofit organizations.
Congress needs to look into whether these nonprofit organizations, directly or indirectly, are supporting people who interfere with federal law enforcement.
Non-governmental organizations played a critical role in sustaining the chaos. Groups like Catholic Charities, operating along the southern border, became de facto partners of the Biden administration. They served as the first stop for migrants after release from Border Patrol custody — offering shelter, services, and a pathway deeper into the United States.
These NGOs gave the White House political cover. By absorbing migrant overflow, they helped reduce the bad optics of people sleeping on sidewalks outside overwhelmed facilities. Even so, mass overcrowding forced thousands into the streets anyway, including during freezing winter months.
Taxpayer-funded, these groups didn’t just serve border towns. They helped migrants reach destinations across the country, arranging transportation and long-term support — despite the migrants’ unresolved legal status. Similar NGOs operated throughout the U.S. interior, extending the federal handoff.
Worse, many of these same organizations operate beyond our borders, guiding migrants along the journey north. From Central America through cartel-controlled regions of Mexico, these so-called humanitarian groups provided aid and logistical support — all while collecting public funds. That support only increased the flow.
In 2023, a shelter director in El Paso told me that around 80% of the women who came through the shelter doors had been raped, sometimes in front of their children. The brutal reality: What NGOs call “help” often exposes vulnerable people to predation, trauma, and lifelong damage. Yes, they reached the United States — but at horrific cost.
RELATED: The corrupt NGOs behind America’s border crisis and their big paydays
On Wednesday, I will testify before the House Homeland Security Committee on this very issue. Congress must act to ensure that taxpayer dollars can never again fund the infrastructure of illegal immigration. Using public funds to support border anarchy is not just bad policy — it’s a betrayal of the American people.
This four-year catastrophe helped spark the unrest now roiling sanctuary cities. Americans elected President Trump to clean it up and to begin the work of mass deportation. They want the damage undone.
Yet these NGOs haven’t disappeared. They’ve shown up at recent protests and riots in Los Angeles County. During a recent federal operation in the El Centro Sector in California, four people were arrested after allegedly placing homemade spikes on the road to disable Border Patrol vehicles. One carried a bag branded with the logo of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles.
Congress needs to look into whether these organizations, directly or indirectly, are supporting people who interfere with federal law enforcement.
The Biden-Harris administration opened the border. NGOs kept it open. And now the country is paying the price. Accountability must come next.
Wisconsin Supreme Court puts Democratic governor in his place with unanimous ruling
The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled unanimously Wednesday that Democratic Gov. Tony Evers "breached his constitutional boundaries" when he partially vetoed and modified substantive portions of a bill in a literacy package last year.
Evers clearly did not appreciate being put in his place.
In the wake of the ruling, Evers claimed that the majority-liberal court's decision was "unconscionable."
Republicans, meanwhile, celebrated the ruling, in one instance throwing leftists' NoKings hashtag back at them.
State Sen. Julian Bradley (R) noted that the governor's "ridiculous and unlawful veto that held up money to teach kids to read has been UNANIMOUSLY ruled unconstitutional," adding that "even the far left-wing justices couldn't find a way to justify @GovEvers' actions. #NoKings."
Shot
Wisconsin's Republican-led legislature sued Evers in April 2024 over his partial veto of a bill intended to help fund literacy programs in the Badger State.
Senate Bill 971 empowered the GOP-controlled state Joint Committee on Finance to direct $50 million set aside in the biennial budget to specific Department of Public Instruction programs created after the budget bill passed, including the literacy coaching program, the DPI's Office of Literacy, and grants for early literacy curriculum.
While Evers approved SB 971, he improperly exercised partial-veto power to strike certain sections of the legislation in part and others in full that he claimed overly complicated "the allocation of funding related to literacy programs in Wisconsin by creating multiple appropriations for what could be accomplished with one."
'Wisconsin families are the real winners here.'
The Democratic governor suggested further that his actions would ensure greater flexibility in meeting the "investment needs for coaches, grants, and professional development alike."
While Evers may partially veto an appropriation bill under Article V, Section 10(1)(b) of the Wisconsin Constitution, this was not an appropriations bill.
The Republican legislators' complaint noted that if the governor mistakenly believed SB 971 was an appropriations bill, "he should have requested the legislature recall the bill in order to pass both houses of the legislature with the proper vote." After all, any bill that appropriates funds must pass both chambers with a roll-call vote — something that had not taken place in this case.
The complaint noted further that the unconstitutional partial veto of SB 971 left the legislature in a dilemma: While the JCF wanted to fund the appropriate literacy programs, "any money directed under the partially vetoed version of [SB 971] might (but should not) be treated by DPI as money that can be used by the Office of Literacy for any nondescript 'literacy program' of DPI's invention."
Chaser
The Wisconsin Supreme Court sided with the Republican legislature against Evers Wednesday and torpedoed his narrative concerning the JCF, which he suggested had been wrong to withhold funds.
The court noted that the Wisconsin Constitution "does not authorize the governor to partially veto a non-appropriation bill, which the governor may veto only in its entirety."
"We hold the governor breached his constitutional boundaries because the bill he partially vetoed was not an appropriation bill," said the ruling. "We also hold JCF did not improperly withhold funds the legislature appropriated to JCF."
As a result of the court's decision, SB 971 as passed by the state legislature — without Evers' changes — is the law.
The Associated Press suggested that the Wisconsin Supreme Court's ruling might also result in the legislature pushing budget and other spending bills in a similar manner to get around Evers' future partial vetoes, thereby securing greater control over spending.
State Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R) and Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R) said in a joint statement that the ruling "is a rebuke of the Governor’s attempt to break apart a bipartisan literacy-funding bill and JCF's constitutional authority to give supplemental funding to agencies."
"While the governor wanted to play politics with money earmarked for kids' reading programs, it is encouraging to see the court put an end to this game. Wisconsin families are the real winners here," they added.
Evers did his best to spin his efforts and pin the holdup of funds on Republicans, writing, "I will never apologize for fighting for our kids and our schools. Not today, not ever."
"Twelve lawmakers should not be able to obstruct resources that were already approved by the full legislature and the governor to help get our kids up to speed and ensure they have the skills they need to be successful," continued Evers. "It is unconscionable that the Wisconsin Supreme Court is allowing the legislature's indefinite obstruction to go unchecked."
The Democratic governor urged the JCF to immediately release the $50 million before the money goes back into the state's general fund next week.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Russ Vought gives Glenn Beck hint about where things stand between Trump and Musk
President Donald Trump and Elon Musk traded jibes on Thursday, which escalated over the course of the afternoon and culminated in threats of creating a new political party as well as of SpaceX contract cancellations.
Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck spoke on Friday to Russell Vought, the director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, about the spat as well as about the president's "big, beautiful bill."
'But look, Glenn, we're moving forward, and Elon has been an important ally and patriot throughout all of this, and we've got a job to do.'
Beck refrained from beating around the bush and asked at the outset whether a reconciliation was imminent — not legislatively but between the world's richest man and the world's most powerful leader. Vought responded with a strong hint.
Prior to Vought jumping onto the call, Beck noted, "Boy, yesterday was just a wild, wild ride. And I hate to see it. You know, kids don't like to see Mommy and Daddy fight — and they're both so important. We need both of these guys, but we also need the truth on the big, beautiful bill."
Beck had also posted on X on Thursday that the disagreement between Trump and Musk was "sad to see" and that he hoped the two "patriots" who "have done heroic things" can make amends and help America "see our way forward to find a win win."
RELATED: I was against Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' — Stephen Miller changed my mind
With Vought on the phone on Friday, Beck asked, "Yesterday was a tough day. Do you know — has the president had his phone call yet? Are they coming back together?"
"Well," responded Vought, "I think the president made some comments to the press this morning that, you know, he's not looking to have a phone call any time soon."
"I think he expressed disappointment yesterday with regard to ... some of the comments made by Elon," continued Vought. "But look, Glenn, we're moving forward, and Elon has been an important ally and patriot throughout all of this, and we've got a job to do."
— (@)
The OMB director stressed that the priority now is getting the bill across the finish line, making improvements where possible.
Whereas Vought was diplomatic in his response, when asked whether he had a call scheduled with Musk for later in the day, Trump told ABC News on Friday morning, "You mean the man who has lost his mind?"
The president suggested he was "not particularly" interested in having that conversation at the moment.
Musk now appears willing to mend fences.
When hedge fund manager Bill Ackman suggested that Trump and Musk "should make peace for the benefit of our great country" and that "we are much stronger together than apart," Musk responded, "You're not wrong."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
I was against Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ — Stephen Miller changed my mind
After the House narrowly passed President Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” — in true Washington fashion, it’s already been reduced to an acronym: BBB — the usual suspects sounded the alarm. Libertarians and deficit hawks recoiled. Elon Musk, the former DOGE chief, called it a “disgusting abomination.” He warned it would pile another $2.4 trillion onto the national debt over the next decade. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) slammed it as hypocritical, saying Republicans can’t keep pushing tax cuts without real spending cuts to match.
I sympathized. I flinched at the trillion-dollar price tag too. My immediate thought: “This is what Democrats and GOP sellouts do — not fiscal conservatives.”
The BBB is the first major Republican bill in decades that doesn’t bend to Democratic narratives. It doesn’t apologize for putting American citizens first.
Then Stephen Miller showed up.
While critics accused the bill of being just another bloated omnibus, Miller pushed back. He took to X to argue that the BBB isn’t some lobbyist-driven monstrosity. It’s a focused, unapologetic conservative package: secure the border, overhaul welfare, and revive the economic growth unleashed by the 2017 tax cuts. For the first time in a long time, I decided to hear the argument out.
Border security for real this time
I didn’t need much convincing on border security. But Miller pointed out something the corporate left-wing media barely mentioned: The BBB fully funds the border wall — both physical infrastructure and new tech. Republicans have promised that since 2016. Nearly a decade later, they finally have a bill that delivers.
— (@)
This isn’t more messaging fluff. The bill puts $45 billion toward border security — the largest commitment in U.S. history. It increases Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention capacity by 800% over the previous fiscal year, funding facilities to detain more than 100,000 people per day. It also includes $8 billion to hire 10,000 new ICE officers and staff.
If the bill ended there, it would be a no-brainer. But I still had concerns — starting with the deficit.
Does it add $2.4 trillion to the deficit?
We can’t call ourselves fiscal conservatives while borrowing like Democrats. Miller knows that, and he didn’t dodge the question.
The bill, he argued, enacts the most sweeping welfare reform in U.S. history. It includes over $2 trillion in net spending cuts. Programs like Medicaid and food stamps would be tied to citizenship and work requirements — policies conservatives have supported for years but rarely fought for seriously in Congress.
And then there’s the tax side.
The BBB extends the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act — one of the clearest drivers of economic growth during Trump’s first term. That’s what triggered the $2.4 trillion deficit estimate, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
But here’s the twist: The CBO’s figure isn’t based on new spending. It’s based on continuing tax relief. Miller’s argument is straightforward — there’s a world of difference between scoring a bill that way and actually running up the national credit card.
RELATED: Trump’s $9.3B rescission push faces a GOP gut check
Attributing the deficit to tax cuts is like blaming hydrogen peroxide for the wound it’s meant to treat. The real cause of the deficit isn’t lower taxes. It’s decades of spending on bloated welfare, bureaucratic waste, and corporate handouts that the DOGE identified — exactly the kind of garbage the BBB cuts.
Even ABC News, buried in the middle of a critical write-up, admitted that the bill would cut taxes by $3.7 trillion and reduce spending by $1.2 trillion. If that’s not a conservative win, what is?
Letting the 2017 tax cuts expire over CBO scoring fears would amount to a massive tax hike on the working and middle classes. Extending them strengthens the economy, boosts small businesses, and keeps the government from choking growth just to massage a deficit number.
Why not pass these reforms separately?
Border security — check. Welfare reform — check. Pro-growth tax cuts — check. So why cram it all into one bill? Why not pass each measure individually, on its own merits?
Miller addressed that too. In a perfect world, each item would pass as a clean bill. But in the real world, every one of these provisions would require 60 votes in the Senate — including Chuck Schumer’s. That’s not happening.
— (@)
The reconciliation process, however, only requires a simple majority. It’s the only legislative path available. For once, Republicans are using the rules the way Democrats do: to win.
I didn’t like it at first. It felt like a compromise. But now I see it as the only way to do what we’ve been saying we want to do for years.
Miller won me over
The BBB is the first major Republican bill in decades that doesn’t bend to Democratic narratives. It doesn’t water down core principles. It doesn’t apologize for putting American citizens first.
And unlike Louisiana Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson’s endless parade of “small ball” continuing resolutions, the BBB actually moves the ball down the field. It lays out a coherent conservative agenda — and the administration is determined to get it passed.
— (@)
I’m still a fiscal hawk. I still want smaller bills, much less spending, and a federal budget that doesn’t look like a summertime pig roast. But I also want results. And this might be the only chance we have to deliver the policy victories we’ve been promised for a generation.
Stephen Miller changed my mind. I hope other conservatives will give him a fair hearing too.
Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com
thefederalist.com