‘The War Chest To Prove It’: Rep. Young Kim Nearly Outraises Dem Opponents Combined In Q1 2025
'She’s got the war chest to prove it'
President Donald Trump and his administration have long been the targets of lawfare motivated by leftists, stretching back to his first term. Although Democrats have played semantic games to categorize these attacks as anything other than politically motivated, one lawmaker finally said the quiet part out loud.
Democratic Rep. Laura Friedman of California told town hall attendees Monday that she and her colleagues regularly gather in closed-door meetings dedicated to plotting legal attacks against Trump and his administration.
While this practice has become commonplace within the Democratic Party, congressional Republicans are doing what they can to put a stop to it.
"Every single week we have a litigation working group where a large group of us, and I'm talking there's maybe 75 members of the House, sit down every single week with the [attorneys general] to talk about legal strategy," Friedman said. "This is all going on every single week behind the scenes. It is nonstop."
Friedman quickly diluted the severity of her admission by mentioning additional and more common avenues politicians use to attack each other.
"It is nonstop introduction of bills and legislation, nonstop being on social media as much as we can without being throttled, without the, you know, crazy analytics, and doing all these things," Friedman said.
Friedman finally confirmed that Democrats are in fact coordinating behind closed doors to weaponize the justice system against their political opponents. While this practice has become commonplace within the Democratic Party, congressional Republicans are doing what they can to put a stop to it.
In light of Friedman's remarks, it's clear that these safeguards are more important than ever.
In recent weeks, numerous federal judges have blocked many of Trump's executive orders in an attempt to stifle his administration. Most notoriously, U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg blocked the administration's deportations of illegal migrants from Venezuela despite their affiliation with the violent gang Tren de Aragua.
As a result, both House and Senate Republicans have introduced legislation to combat these rogue judges.
Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah introduced the Restraining Judicial Activists Act in late March, which would establish a district court with three judges to check rulings made against the executive branch. At the same time, Republican Rep. Darrell Issa of California introduced the No Rogue Rulings Act, which limits district judges' power of imposing nationwide injunctions. Issa's bill passed the House in early April and is now on its way to the Senate.
In light of Friedman's remarks, it's clear that these safeguards are more important than ever.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
The House passed a Republican-led bill requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration on Thursday. Despite Democrats' overwhelming disapproval of the key legislation, four Democratic lawmakers reached across the aisle.
Texas Republican Rep. Chip Roy's SAVE Act was passed in a 220-208 vote almost entirely along party lines, similar to the bill's narrow passage in the previous Congress.
Just as they did in 2024, Democrats voted to tank Roy's bill, with just a handful defecting and joining Republicans: Reps. Ed Case of Hawaii, Henry Cuellar of Texas, Jared Golden of Maine, and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington.
While this handful of Democrats bucked their party on a key vote, they likely did so just for political survival.
"I voted for the SAVE Act for the simple reason that American elections are for Americans," Golden said in a statement Thursday. "Requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote is common sense."
Golden, who has previously defected from his party on other key votes, additionally defended the SAVE Act and even debunked some misconceptions about the bill.
"Some claim that requiring proof of citizenship is too onerous a burden, or that it will 'disenfranchise' those whose names have changed for reasons like marriage," Golden said. "The truth is the SAVE Act ensures name changes will not prevent anyone from registering to vote."
"The bill allows for several different ways to prove citizenship," Golden added. "But most importantly, it requires state leaders to establish protocols to allow citizens to register even if there are discrepancies in documents, such as name changes."
In statements shared with Blaze News, both Cuellar and Case echoed Golden's position, arguing that the standards put forward by the SAVE Act ensure that the law is enforced properly.
"Noncitizen voting is illegal, and we should all know that noncitizens are not voting," Case said. "The SAVE Act provides consistent national standards for what documentation is necessary to prove citizenship and the right to vote."
"It includes various acceptable forms of identification which most voter-eligible citizens should have and those who don’t should be able to obtain," Case added. "Fears of voter suppression because of these standards are overstated and should not prevent reasonable citizen ID requirements, and voter suppression is in any event illegal.”
"Ultimately, this is about protecting the integrity of our elections while ensuring every eligible American has a fair chance to vote — whether you are a man or a woman, single, married, divorced, or widowed," Cuellar said. "That’s how we keep trust in our democracy, and that’s something worth standing up for.”
Notably, every Democrat who voted for the SAVE Act, with the exception of Case, resides in a district that President Donald Trump won in 2024. Trump won Golden's district with 53.8%, Cuellar's district with 53.1%, and Perez's district with exactly 50%.
These Democrats also narrowly won re-election in their respective purple districts last election cycle. Golden won with just 50.3% of the vote, Cuellar won with 52.8%, and Perez held on to her seat with 51.7%.
While this handful of Democrats bucked their party on a key vote, they likely did so just for political survival.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Congress is about to pass what was billed as a once-in-a-generation budget reconciliation bill to rein in inflation. Instead, Republicans have delivered more spending, more debt, and a grab bag of random, inefficient tax cuts. After promising to slash the Biden-era debt explosion, GOP leaders have produced a plan with no major reforms and a laughable 0.004% spending cut over 10 years — after increasing spending.
Conservatives reluctantly backed the House reconciliation bill under pressure from President Trump. The bill didn’t promise immediate savings, but it instructed committees to identify between $1.5 trillion and $2 trillion in mandatory spending cuts over a decade. In exchange, Republicans agreed to raise the debt ceiling by $4 trillion and handed out $4.5 trillion in tax cuts — largely just an extension of existing tax breaks with a few extras tacked on.
After the most consequential election of our lifetime, conservatives are simply asking for one thing: a reconciliation bill that actually means something.
But there’s no repeal of Obamacare. No serious health care reform. No direct strategy to move people off welfare. Nothing resembling a bold or transformational policy. The top-line number might nudge future welfare reform, but that’s speculative at best. Meanwhile, the bill greenlights $300 billion in new spending for the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security — without meaningful offsets or reforms.
This was a modest plan — far too modest — given the projected $89 trillion in federal spending over the next decade. That estimate assumes no recessions (despite the fact that we’re likely entering one now) and no major natural disasters, which occur almost annually.
Even under those rosy assumptions, the House budget accepts more than $20 trillion in new deficits over 10 years. And it banks on implausible economic growth, driven not by structural reforms, but by the simple extension of current tax rates and a few marginal changes — such as excluding tips, Social Security benefits, and overtime from taxation and boosting state and local tax deductions. These are hardly the hallmarks of a pro-growth revolution.
Still, conservatives recognized that with their so-called once-in-a-lifetime shot at a “new golden age,” this underwhelming package might be the best they could get.
Then came the Senate with a bait and switch.
The Senate passed a bill that technically allows the House to keep working under its budget instructions, but it directs Senate committees to cut just $4 billion. That’s billion with a “B,” not trillion with a “T.” In a projected $89 trillion budget, $4 billion represents a pathetic 0.004%.
Meanwhile, the same bill raises the debt ceiling by $5 trillion — the largest increase in U.S. history — and authorizes $5.3 trillion in tax cuts. Of that, $3.8 trillion is classified as an extension of current rates and therefore magically excluded from being scored as a revenue loss.
We always knew even the modest $1.5 trillion in proposed spending cuts over 10 years would be too much for tepid Republicans. Still, we expected them to negotiate that number down — maybe to $1 trillion. Instead, Senate Republicans came to the table with an opening bid of just $4 billion. That microscopic figure signals they have no intention of cutting more than a few hundred billion over the next decade — at most.
For perspective, that amounts to about $30 billion in cuts from an annual budget nearing $7 trillion and expected to hit $10 trillion by the end of the 10-year window.
But even those paltry cuts aren’t real.
The Senate bill already authorizes $521 billion in new, immediate spending for defense and the border. Lawmakers would need to find an equal amount in savings just to break even. As it stands, the only firm commitment in the legislation is to pile another $5.8 trillion onto the national debt — beyond Biden’s already bloated baseline.
Even under the most generous dynamic scoring — such as estimates from the Tax Foundation — the bill would still leave us with an additional $5 trillion in red ink after accounting for $710 billion in recouped revenue.
Remember, once the House agrees to adopt the Senate’s budget, it forfeits any leverage. Under budget reconciliation rules, any split in proposed spending cuts between the House and Senate committees defaults to the Senate’s numbers. That means the Senate’s meager $4 billion in cuts — not the House’s higher target — will carry the day.
— (@)
The result? Republicans will effectively codify all of Biden’s spending levels. The only area left to negotiate will be tax policy — a dubious consolation, especially in an inflationary environment that demands deficit reduction.
Even that tax policy falls short. These aren’t bold, growth-oriented reforms. They’re narrow, parochial carve-outs for select workers and retirees. Worse still, Republicans plan to burn through revenue by expanding the deduction for state and local taxes.
Their top priority? Giving high earners in blue states a break.
The GOP’s moderate wing refuses to accept even a proposal to raise the SALT cap from $10,000 to $25,000. Instead, these Republicans want unlimited deductions — a gift to the wealthy in California and New York, disguised as fiscal policy.
Tax cuts aren’t the same as spending increases — they can spur economic growth. But in a time of sustained inflation, reducing the deficit matters more. Most Americans now lose more to inflation than they pay in taxes. And not all tax cuts are equal. Growth-focused policy doesn’t mean carving out special breaks for retirees, tipped workers, or high earners in blue states.
House conservatives have already taken one hit after another. At Trump’s urging, they passed a continuing resolution in December that included $200 billion in supplemental spending with no offsets. Then, they backed another CR in March — again with no cuts. Now, with budget reconciliation on the table, it’s time to make good on all those earlier compromises.
Trump should stop pressuring conservatives and instead focus on Senate Republicans. He needs to demand that Senate moderates adopt the House version of the bill.
He must also make the case — clearly and forcefully — that runaway welfare spending is a major driver of inflation. That means pushing for meaningful reforms: repealing elements of the Green New Deal, overhauling health care and welfare, and delivering tax cuts that benefit a broad base of working Americans and small businesses.
We’re not asking for much. After what was billed as the most consequential election of our lifetime, conservatives are simply asking for one thing: a reconciliation bill that actually means something.
The House narrowly passed the Senate's budget blueprint on Thursday, notching another win for Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.).
The vote was initially set to take place Wednesday night but was later postponed by Johnson after it became clear there wasn't enough support from fiscal conservatives to pass the budget. Ultimately, the blueprint passed in a 216-214 vote, with Republican Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Victoria Spartz of Indiana voting against it.
"If you were trying to hasten financial collapse of our country and bribe voters to go along with it, the strategy wouldn’t look much different than what Congress is doing today," Massie said. "The big beautiful bill cuts taxes while keeping spending on an increasingly unsustainable trajectory."
The House and Senate have already passed their own blueprints that included $1.5 trillion and $4 billion in cuts, respectively. With the House taking up the Senate's budget proposal, lawmakers have had difficulty reconciling the vast spending gap.
'Our ambition in the Senate is we are aligned in the House in terms of savings. We're certainly gonna do everything we can to be as aggressive as possible.'
Despite the backing of President Donald Trump's administration, fiscal conservatives disapproved of the Senate's budget, arguing that the proposed $4 billion in cuts are just a drop in the bucket in addressing the national debt. On the Senate side, lawmakers are insisting that their blueprint will give them enough wiggle room and that they are ultimately aiming to implement more aggressive cuts beyond their $4 billion target.
If the House's ambitious blueprint with $1.5 trillion in cuts were passed, committees would likely be unable to meet the required cuts, which would kill the reconciliation process altogether. Simply put, the Senate doesn't have the same appetite for cuts that the House Freedom Caucus and other fiscal conservatives do.
Nevertheless, some holdouts warmed up to the budget blueprint after Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) held a joint press conference with Johnson Thursday morning.
"Our ambition in the Senate is we are aligned in the House in terms of savings," Thune said. "We're certainly gonna do everything we can to be as aggressive as possible.”
"[This is] the first time publicly, the Senate leader has come out and actually said that we’re in the same ballpark with the House and Senate reductions," House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris (R-Md.) said Thursday. "Obviously we were happy with the House spending reduction because we all voted for it, so I think that’s a step in a positive direction.”
Other Republicans like Rep. Marlin Stutzman of Indiana, who were initially undecided, came around to supporting the budget after meeting with Johnson.
"I voted to pass the Trump-endorsed budget resolution before the House today so Congress can unlock the reconciliation process, which will grow the economy, increase American energy production, secure our border, and decrease spending to the same levels that House Republicans passed six weeks ago," Stutzman told Blaze News. "It is time American citizens and fixing our national debt take priority over wasteful, unnecessary spending.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
The House passed another key immigration bill Thursday despite Democrats nearly unanimously voting to tank the legislation.
The SAVE Act, which was spearheaded by Republican Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, passed in a near party-line vote with 216 Republicans voting for the bill and 208 Democrats voting against it. Just four Democrats joined Republicans to pass the legislation.
"The bill is pretty simple," Roy said. "It just simply says you've got to demonstrate with documentary proof of citizenship that you're a citizen the next time you're going through the cycle of your registration process, or if a state decides to clean out their voter rolls."
'Free, fair, and honest elections unmarred by fraud, errors, or suspicion are fundamental to maintaining our constitutional Republic.'
Some critics have suggested that the bill is redundant as it is already illegal for noncitizens to vote in elections. Despite this, voter registration relies on individuals to self-report their own citizenship status without verification. Roy's bill would close that existing loophole and fortify elections against illegal voting.
"All this would do is prevent illegals from voting," Roy added. "We believe that only American citizens should vote in American elections."
The SAVE Act narrowly passed the House in the previous Congress with the support of five Democrats. However, the bill was struck down by then-Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who refused to take the bill to the floor.
Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) also previously attached the SAVE Act to a funding bill in September, which was met with backlash from Democrats. Former President Joe Biden even committed to vetoing the continuing resolution if the SAVE Act was attached to it.
This time around, Roy's bill is facing better odds with President Donald Trump's supportive administration as well as a comfortable Republican majority in the Senate. Trump even issued an executive order in March that mirrored aspects of Roy's legislation, further bolstering the integrity of American elections.
"Free, fair, and honest elections unmarred by fraud, errors, or suspicion are fundamental to maintaining our constitutional Republic," the order reads. "The right of American citizens to have their votes properly counted and tabulated, without illegal dilution, is vital to determining the rightful winner of an election."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!