Cory Mills leaps into another scandal — this time with a 5-figure price tag and eviction notice



Rep. Cory Mills, the Florida Republican who has in recent months faced allegations of stolen valor, undergoing a secret Islamic conversion, holding weapons contracts with the federal government while serving in Congress, and domestic violence, appears to have leapfrogged into yet another scandal, this time over a luxury apartment in Washington, D.C., where rent exceeds $20,800 per month.

Independent investigative journalist Roger Sollenberger revealed on Monday that Mills faced possible eviction for failure to pay months' worth of rent on a D.C. penthouse managed by the Bozzuto Management Company.

According to documents filed by Parcel 47F LLC — Mills' landlord — and Bozzuto Management Co. in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia last week, the congressman failed to pay $85,009.80 in rent from March to July.

The landlord's resident ledger also appears to show that Mills was late in paying rent most months since his June 2023 move-in date, accruing around $15,000 in late fees by January 2025.

— (@)  
 

Mills' property manager threatened him with a lawsuit in January, stating in a letter obtained by Sollenberger, "Your balance of rent as of today is $17,361.00 and your total balance is $18,229.05. A ledger showing the dates of rent charges and payments for the period of delinquency is enclosed."

The manager of the property — where Metropolitan Police Department officers were called in February in connection with Mills' alleged domestic violence incident — also noted that the congressman's failure to pay the balance of unpaid rent would ultimately result in his eviction.

While paying or failing to pay rent for the D.C. luxury property, Mills has also apparently been paying rent for a beachfront property in New Smyrna Beach, Florida — the last known rental value of which was $12,000 per month.

'Facts are a finicky thing.'

Although Mills' annual congressional salary is just over $170,000, estimates published online put his net worth somewhere between $8.15 million and $40.35 million as of December. While such estimates would suggest he is good for the rent payments, Blaze Media investigations have shown that Mills and corporations in his name are actually millions of dollars in debt.

RELATED: Stolen valor? Veterans dispute Cory Mills’ record: 'He fooled a lot of us'

  Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

Mills responded to Sollenberger on X, calling him a "biased hack" and claiming that the missed payments were not for a lack of trying but rather the result of technical difficulties and process failures.

The congressman shared two supposed emails, one dated June 17 and the other dated July 3, in which he indicated that he was following up with regard to payments and a broken link.

"Facts are a finicky thing but wouldn't expect you to be anything other than a biased hack!" said Mills.

— (@)  
 

Sollenberger was quick to point out that Mills provided screenshots of emails sent only after he allegedly missed four monthly rent payments.

"What about the warning in January for missed rent? Or the 18 months of late rent? The fact is your landlord is evicting you in court," wrote Sollenberger.

RELATED: GOP Rep. Cory Mills explains why he was married by a radical Islamic cleric

  Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images

Sollenberger said in a statement to Blaze News, "The great thing about living rent-free in someone's head is you can't get evicted for non-payment."

"However, I do think it's valid to ask why and how a sitting congressman who is personally liable for tens of millions of dollars in unpaid corporate debt (which he's never disclosed, in apparent violation of federal law) would spend $350,000 a year to rent homes in D.C. and Florida — while simultaneously claiming to donate his entire congressional salary to charities that he refuses to publicly identify," continued Sollenberger. "I've asked Cory about this several times, including yesterday. For some reason, he refuses to answer."

Mills talked around the matter during an X Spaces hosted by conservative commentator David Pollack on Monday. While the congressman did not address why he failed to pay his landlord, he suggested that he was the subject of controversy because he was "trying to disrupt the status quo."

A spokesperson for Mills told Blaze News that "the congressman's landlord was able to fix the payment portal after Mills' persistent requests over the past few months. Mills has paid his bill in full."

"Let there be no mistake: Congressman Mills always intended to pay his rent, and he is grateful to have resolved the issue with his D.C. landlord," added the spokesperson, who sent along a letter from Mills' Florida landlord, who indicated that "he pays rent on time every month, without exception."

RELATED: Conspiracy: Does rogue FBI agent put freedom of speech at risk?

  Screenshot of letter given to Blaze News

Blaze News has reached out to Mills' D.C. landlord as well as to a lawyer representing the organization in the lawsuit for confirmation that the bill has been paid and for comment on whether the legal action will be dropped.

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

Who was president these last four years? We deserve an answer



The Biden years increasingly resemble a desperate effort to avoid invoking the 25th Amendment — no matter the cost.

That’s why the Oversight Project’s autopen investigation has captured the attention of the public, Congress, and, most importantly, the Trump administration’s Department of Justice.

President Trump didn’t hesitate: “THE AUTOPEN IS THE BIGGEST POLITICAL SCANDAL IN AMERICAN HISTORY!!!” he declared on Truth Social. He offered one caveat — the 2020 election still ranks first. I agree, even with my own involvement in uncovering the autopen scandal.

Americans knew something was wrong with Joe Biden. Whether they admitted it or not, nearly everyone sensed it. Some underestimated the severity. Others preferred denial, choosing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

But beneath that uneasy consensus lay a deeper question: Who was actually running the country?

Our early disclosures from the still-ongoing autopen investigation began to answer that. When we revealed that President Biden wasn’t personally signing documents that require a sitting president’s signature, the public understood the implications immediately.

'Who was president the last four years?' isn’t just a political talking point. It’s a matter of constitutional legitimacy.

This wasn’t just about procedural shortcuts. It revealed a White House operating without a fully functional commander in chief.

The damage done during the Biden years goes far beyond bad policy. His presidency humiliated the United States on the world stage — not just as a geopolitical power, but as a constitutional republic.

We portray ourselves as the world’s most advanced democracy. We’ve even invaded other countries in the name of exporting that model. But what credibility do we have if we refuse to follow the most basic rule written into our own Constitution — namely, that we are governed by a single functioning individual known as the president?

Democrats warned that Donald Trump was an existential threat to democracy. In reality, the greater threat came from an incapacitated president being steered by unelected, unaccountable staffers behind the scenes.

After President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963, Congress responded with common sense. Lawmakers recognized the need for a clear constitutional process to handle death or incapacity in the executive branch. This wasn’t theoretical — America had already seen four assassinated presidents in less than a century. The system had failed under Garfield, who lingered for months after being shot, and under Wilson, who suffered a debilitating stroke while in office.

The result was the 25th Amendment, ratified in 1967. It created a legal framework for what to do when a president dies, resigns, is removed, or becomes unable to perform the duties of the office. In the case of incapacity, the process requires the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet to send Congress a written declaration stating that the president can no longer discharge the powers and duties of the office.

What the drafters likely didn’t imagine was that the vice president and Cabinet might choose to ignore that duty — out of cowardice, political calculation, or worse.

Why did Vice President Kamala Harris and Biden’s Cabinet spend four years sidestepping the exact constitutional process meant for this scenario? That question demands an answer.

Biden was so isolated that according to credible reports, even the secretary of the treasury couldn’t get access to him. How does a Cabinet secretary accept being blocked from seeing the president without sounding the alarm?

RELATED: The real scandal isn’t Joe Biden’s decline — it’s who hid it from you

 Photo by ANGELA WEISS/AFP via Getty Images

The first step to answering those questions is to ask them.

As investigations by Ed Martin, the House, and the Senate ramp up, they must put Kamala Harris and Biden’s Cabinet under oath. Those people need to explain, clearly and publicly, why they refused to invoke the 25th Amendment.

Congress has not only the authority but the duty to demand those answers. Its oversight power reaches its peak when the subject directly informs legislative action. And no legislation ranks higher than a constitutional amendment. If the 25th Amendment failed to prevent a four-year constitutional charade, then it needs to be amended. The drafters can’t be blamed for failing to imagine a real-life “Weekend at Bernie’s.” Sometimes the Constitution needs a second draft.

“Who was president the last four years?” isn’t just a political talking point. It’s a matter of constitutional legitimacy. That question now echoes across the world. It exposes a critical vulnerability in our system — and it demands accountability.

The only path forward involves full transparency. Absent a last-minute confession from those responsible, only the Trump administration, backed by Congress, can deliver that reckoning.

When the federal government functions for years in open defiance of its founding charter, it doesn’t just cause scandal. It destroys trust. And that erosion of trust rests atop an already collapsing foundation — widespread doubts about election integrity, mass illegal immigration encouraged by the state to engineer political and demographic outcomes, and a legal system increasingly unmoored from equal protection, openly experimenting with race- and sex-based favoritism in the name of “equity.”

All of that adds up to a constitutional crisis. And unless we confront it head-on, the result won’t just be distrust. It will be disaster.

Trump Isn’t Destroying Harvard. Harvard Has Destroyed Itself

The Ivy’s embrace of leftist ideology, discriminatory admission practices, and fraudulent faculty has killed its prestige.

The real scandal isn’t Joe Biden’s decline — it’s who hid it from you



The Prime Cut Diamond Drilling company defines a controlled demolition as:

The process of systematically demolishing a structure in order to achieve a certain objective. Often used for work on buildings where high control measures of safety and order are essential, controlled demolition ensures that disturbance to the surrounding structures and area is kept to a minimum.

The company makes clear that a controlled demolition isn’t just blowing up buildings with dynamite, swinging wrecking balls, or making noise with drills and burst charges. It’s about precision. Even the Occupational Safety and Health Administration maintains a web of standards, subparts, and interpretive letters to help ensure compliance with destruction — done by the book, clean and contained.

Why would the Trump administration make such a colossal mistake to reward those who propped up Biden and failed to perform their duty to investigate the truth?

This same concept — orderly destruction — eerily mirrors what the legacy media and Democratic Party are doing to Joe Biden. Their goal: dispose of him and his political baggage as efficiently as possible. As Gwen Walz might put it, it’s time to “turn the page.” The priority isn’t honesty. It’s containment. Limit the damage to Biden and his family. Protect the political infrastructure that carried him into power.

At the center of this choreographed takedown: a conveniently timed book from CNN’s Jake Tapper and Axios’ Alex Thompson. For dramatic effect, the public gets a sudden, “unexpected” admission of Biden’s health problems — framing the collapse as a personal tragedy rather than an institutional failure.

None of this should surprise anyone. Fortunately, most Americans see through the staged confessional period now playing out across the media. It’s political kayfabe — an orchestrated performance where journalists and insiders finally admit what they’ve known for years: Joe Biden wasn’t running the country.

What they still refuse to confront is the real question: if not Biden, then who?

These same operatives now expect to walk away with their reputations intact. They offer carefully worded regret, maybe a little contrition, and assume that’s enough to preserve their elite status.

We cannot let them off the hook.

The American public deserves transparency and accountability for the chaos and destruction of the Biden years. The people who called the shots behind the scenes must be named. They must answer for what they did.

A shameless cash grab

For four years, Democrats insisted that “democracy was under attack.” Fine. Then tell us: Who actually held power inside the White House? Who made the decisions? Who overrode the president?

You don’t get to wave the flag of constitutional order while hiding the names of those who exercised executive authority in secret. That’s not how a functioning republic is supposed to work. Pretending otherwise insults every voter and mocks the very system these people claim to protect.

RELATED: The Great Biden Book War has finally begun

  Photo by Roy Rochlin/Getty Images

The media should be held accountable alongside those who exercised presidential authority on Joe Biden’s behalf. Tapper and Thompson’s new book isn’t journalism — it’s a shameless attempt to cash in on a cover-up they actively helped sustain.

Throughout the Biden presidency, both CNN and Axios prioritized access to the White House over honesty with the American public. Axios will point to a handful of criticisms they published, but a full review of their coverage tells the real story: They consistently accepted and repeated the Biden administration’s preferred narrative.

They showed no interest in investigating the Biden family’s ties to the Chinese Communist Party. They downplayed Special Counsel Robert Hur’s probe into Biden’s mishandling of classified documents. And now they’re dismissing our investigation into the White House’s use of an autopen to sign documents — an effort that kept the paper trail moving while insulating the president from oversight.

But the betrayal runs deeper than journalistic malpractice. Tapper and Thompson’s work isn’t just morally compromised — it’s commercially rigged. Axios has a clear financial stake in its own reporter being the center of the story. That context matters, especially when Axios somehow obtained the audio recordings of Biden’s long-sought interview with Hur.

Those tapes didn’t fall from the sky.

The Oversight Project spent the past year in litigation, pushing the Justice Department toward a decision on releasing them by May 20. We negotiated in good faith with the government, believing the process would result in a fair release.

Then, late on Friday, May 16, Axios dropped select portions of the Hur interview — bylined by none other than Alex Thompson.

Absent from their story? Any editor’s note disclosing Thompson’s direct financial interest in the book set to release just days later.

Maximum spin job

Why would the Trump administration make such a colossal mistake to reward those who actively propped up Biden and failed to perform their duty to investigate the truth? All the talk of the “fake news being the enemy of the people” seems insincere when Jake Tapper’s business partner is given the scoop.

And it’s not just the Trump administration implicitly sanctioning Axios and CNN’s role in this long history; it’s that Axios also massively botched the rollout itself. This is a key part of a controlled demolition.

In the hours after the tapes dropped, our legal team at the Oversight Project scrambled to make sense of what had just happened. We, along with others, had operated in good faith — only to be blindsided when those negotiations suddenly veered in the opposite direction.

A closer review of Axios’ release revealed the deception. The audio had been edited using “jump cuts” that made Biden sound worse in places. We knew immediately how that would play out. Biden’s defenders would seize on the edits to discredit the broader argument. And they did. At this point, calling it coincidence stretches belief.

Every step of this process has aimed to shield Biden — and the people who kept him in place — from real accountability. That pattern continues to this day.

Back in February, we forced the Department of Justice to commit to a deadline: May 20. It agreed to make a decision on whether to release the Hur interview tapes. Shortly after, Tapper and Thompson’s book was announced. The timeline doesn’t feel random. It looks scripted. This wasn’t chaos — it was a controlled demolition.

The autopen investigation

At the Oversight Project, we don’t intend to let that plan succeed.

We won’t allow them to shut the book on the Biden years with a whisper instead of a reckoning.

We’ll provide the dynamite. We’ll swing the wrecking ball. And when the moment demands precision, we’ll bring the drill and the charges. The key to unraveling this entire deception lies in one place: the autopen investigation.

Whoever controlled the autopen controlled the White House. Biden wasn’t running the show. Everyone knows that now. The next step is identifying who was.

And we won’t need Tapper's or Thompson’s help to get there. In fact, they’ve wandered directly into our demolition zone.

Congress Must Use Every Tool At Its Disposal To Uncover Biden DementiaGate Cover-Up

A constitutional law expert says Trump should do what Biden did: waive executive privilege to release Biden White House records.

Retired 4-star Navy admiral convicted after using his post to line his 'own pockets'



Retired four-star Navy Admiral Robert Burke, formerly the Navy's second-highest ranking officer, was convicted by a federal jury Monday on felony bribery charges.

U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro, who announced the verdict a day after instructing criminals to "run for the hills," said in a statement, "When you abuse your position and betray the public trust to line your own pockets, it undermines the confidence in the government you represent."

While overseeing U.S. naval operations in Europe, Russia, and most of Africa, and commanding thousands of military personnel, Burke awarded a government contract to a company that had been told not to communicate with him. Several months later, Burke ended up with a lucrative gig and hundreds of thousands of stock options at that same company.

The company — which the Department of Justice did not name but the New York Times indicated was the New York-based technology and work force training company Next Jump — provided a workforce training pilot program to a "small component of the Navy" from August 2018 through July 2019. The original indictment against Burke indicated that the company had subcontracts for this work from another company, similarly unnamed in federal court documents, via the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

'Burke made several false and misleading statements to the Navy.'

According to the DOJ, the Navy scrapped its contract with the company in late 2019 and directed it not to contact Burke.

Despite this directive, the company's two co-chief executives, Yongchul Kim and Meghan Messenger — who were both arrested and charged last year in connection with the scheme — allegedly emailed Burke on May 10, 2021, to propose a $20 million contract for their company to provide workforce training, despite no indication of need on the part of U.S. naval forces in Europe and Africa, bids or otherwise.

The trio reportedly met in Washington, D.C., in July 2021.

During their meeting, Kim and Messenger agreed that Burke would use his official position in the Navy to secure a new contract for the company in exchange for a position there following his retirement, said the DOJ. The trio also apparently agreed that the second highest-ranking officer in the Navy would lean on other officers to award the company with an additional training contract, which one of Burke's co-defendants allegedly estimated to be valued at "triple digit millions."

Burke commanded his staff in December 2021 to dish out a $355,000 contract to the company to train personnel under his command in Italy and Spain. Burke then championed the company after the January 2022 training session in a failed effort to get another senior admiral to award it a government contract.

RELATED: Trump names Jeanine Pirro of Fox News as interim US attorney of DC after failed Ed Martin nomination

 Photo (left): Terry Wyatt/Getty Images; Photo (right): Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

The Justice Department indicated that in order to conceal the scheme, "Burke made several false and misleading statements to the Navy, including by falsely implying that Company A's employment discussions with Burke only began months after the contract was awarded and omitting the truth on his required government ethics disclosure forms."

Several months later, Burke went to work for Next Jump at a yearly starting salary of $500,000 with the added bonus of a grant of 100,000 stock options.

At the time of Burke's arrest last May, then-FBI Special Agent in Charge David Scott stated, "As a four-star admiral, Burke not only cheated U.S. taxpayers but also did a disservice to military personnel under his command."

The original criminal indictment against Burke stressed that the admiral had a lawful duty not to accept any gift or other item of monetary value from any person or entity seeking official action from the Navy; not to engage in outside employment that conflicted with official government duties and responsibilities; not to participate personally and substantially in an "official capacity in any particular matter that had a direct and predictable effect on his financial interests"; and to disqualify himself from taking official action that affected financial interests of a potential employer of seeking employment.

Blaze News reached out to the Pentagon for comment, which deferred to the Navy. The Navy did not respond by publication time. Next Jump similarly did not respond when pressed for comment.

'The jury was prevented from hearing the whole truth.'

After a five-day trial, a federal jury found Burke guilty of conspiracy to commit bribery, bribery, performing acts affecting a personal financial interest, and concealing material facts from the United States.

Burke is due to be sentenced on Aug. 22 and could land up to 30 years in the slammer.

Pirro said Monday, "Our office, with our law enforcement partners, will root out corruption — be it bribes or illegal contracts — and hold accountable the perpetrators, no matter what title or rank they hold."

The admiral's lawyer, Timothy Parlatore, said in an interview Monday that Burke plans to appeal his conviction, reported the Times.

RELATED: Ex-Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez's wife convicted for her role in bribery scheme: 'Partners in crime'

 

"They presented a tiny, tiny sliver of evidence," said Parlatore. "We do think this is a case where a wrongful conviction was obtained because the jury was prevented from hearing the whole truth."

Reed Brodsky, a lawyer for Next Jump, told the Times that he expects a different outcome in the cases of Kim and Messenger, who are scheduled for trial in August.

"I expect the evidence will show that Burke and others at the Navy misled Charlie and Meghan in material ways, and they're not liable for bribing the guy who lied to them," wrote Brodsky. "I think it'll be a little embarrassing for the Navy."

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

New pope, old problem: Will Leo XIV resist tyranny?



Catholics have a new pope: Leo XIV. Most of the cardinals who elected him were appointed by Pope Francis, and at first glance, the new pontiff appears to share much with his predecessor. But it’s early yet. Catholics should pray that Leo charts a very different course. The reason is simple: The Catholic Church finds itself locked in a battle against three hostile ideologies — globalism, Islam, and communism. And right now, it’s losing on all fronts.

Pope Francis earned the nickname the "People’s Pope,” a title meant to suggest he championed ordinary Catholics. In truth, he aligned more closely with the globalist left. He openly opposed President Trump’s push to restore American borders and criticized similar efforts by European nations to reclaim their sovereignty. Under Francis, the Church’s advocacy of open borders helped dismantle Western Christendom by encouraging the mass migration of Muslims into Europe. Many of these migrants view their secularized Christian hosts with contempt. European leaders, meanwhile, steeped in guilt and detached from the virtues of their own civilization, capitulated. The result: rape, murder, and a continent sinking into self-loathing. Only a radical reformation can pull Europe back from the brink.

Communism and Christianity cannot coexist. The new pope must say so — clearly, unambiguously, and without fear.

Francis also failed pastorally. Faced with the ongoing sexual abuse crisis that has haunted the Church for decades, he refused to lead with transparency or justice. When he became pope, he had the chance to hold predatory priests accountable for their demonic crimes and restore trust among the faithful. Instead, he did next to nothing. His silence signaled to the hierarchy that abuse could still be covered up, even tolerated. That betrayal deepened the wounds of a Church already in crisis and demoralized millions of believers.

Pope Leo XIV now has a moment to break with the past. He must act swiftly and decisively. The Church cannot afford another papacy of retreat and complicity.

A disgraceful bargain

In December 2017, Pope Francis appeared on Italian television and publicly questioned the traditional wording of the Lord’s Prayer. The closing line — “And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil” (Matthew 6:13, Luke 11:4) — is a direct teaching from Christ. Francis asked, “What kind of Father would lead his children into temptation?”

That question revealed a deeper confusion. The line reflects not divine cruelty but the profound gift of human freedom. God grants mankind free will — the ability to choose between good and evil, between virtue and temptation. The Lord’s Prayer acknowledges that freedom and asks God to help us navigate it. Pope Francis, it seems, struggled to grasp this. His discomfort with the line suggests a broader discomfort with the idea that freedom comes with moral risk — and that risk, in turn, calls for responsibility, discipline, and faith.

At the same time, Francis sent disgraced pedophile Cardinal Theodore McCarrick to Beijing to negotiate a secret deal with the Chinese Communist Party. That deal handed partial control of the Church in China to the Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association, a CCP-run front established in 1957 to suppress Christianity and replace it with a state-approved imitation.

Religious freedom in communist China remains a fiction. Teaching the faith to children is effectively banned. The Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association exists not to protect believers but to pacify the Vatican and deceive the West. It offers a false promise of coexistence — as long as Catholicism conforms to state-imposed restrictions. Some call this process the “Sinicization” of the Church. A more accurate term would be its communization.

RELATED: Not Francis 2.0: Why Pope Leo XIV is a problem for the ‘woke’ agenda

  Photo by ALBERTO PIZZOLI/AFP via Getty Images

The CCP has not simply demanded obedience — it has altered doctrine and replaced sacred symbols. The crucifix — central to the Christian faith as a reminder of Christ’s suffering — has been replaced in churches with portraits of Xi Jinping. That’s not contextualization. That’s desecration.

McCarrick, a despicable character to be sure, traveled to China at least three times to help broker the Vatican’s secret agreement with the CCP. Those negotiations produced disturbing compromises: among them, a shared arrangement where the Vatican and the Communist Party jointly approve bishops. Cardinal Joseph Zen of Hong Kong has condemned the deal as a betrayal of faithful Chinese Catholics — many of whom spent their lives resisting communist persecution.

Even Pope Francis acknowledged that the agreement would cause suffering. He was right. Since its implementation, the CCP’s Ministry of State Security has “disappeared” at least 15 bishops who refused to submit to party rule. Their whereabouts remain unknown.

But the suffering extends further — to millions of Chinese parents forbidden from teaching their children about Jesus. Families must wait until their children turn 18 before they can legally attend church, at which point they don’t approach the altar as supplicants to God but as subjects of the Chinese Communist Party. This forced delay in faith formation is not only spiritually damaging — it is deeply humiliating. It turns the act of worship into a form of ideological submission.

No more submission

Some may argue that Chinese Catholics are better off with a compromised, state-approved church than with no church at all. Pope Francis may have reasoned that accepting the replacement of the cross — the profound symbol of Christ’s suffering — with portraits of the Chinese Communist Party’s first secretary was a small price for institutional survival.

But allowing an atheistic regime to oversee Christian worship amounts to cruelty disguised as prudence. It undermines the very purpose of the church. There is something profoundly demoralizing to the entire world to watch the Holy Roman Catholic Church behave in such a craven manner.

Pope Leo XIV must draw a clear line. He must reject every agreement with the Chinese Communist Party that surrenders human freedom in exchange for bureaucratic recognition. The freedom of conscience, the freedom to worship, and the freedom to speak the truth — these stand at the heart of the Christian mission. In China, the underground church continues to bear witness to that mission. Its members worship in secret, often at great personal risk, defying a regime that demands their silence and obedience. Their defiance reveals a faith rooted in courage and dignity.

The CCP’s version of Catholicism, by contrast, fuses materialism, Maoism, and political submission. No Catholic worthy of the name should pretend that such a hybrid represents anything but ideological fraud. Communism and Christianity cannot coexist. The new pope must say so — clearly, unambiguously, and without fear.

What should alarm the faithful most is the Vatican’s submission to totalitarian rule. Instead of forming a bulwark against tyranny, the Catholic Church has, through its secret pact with Beijing, told its flock to put Caesar before God. That message contradicts the very heart of the faith. The Vatican must repeal its secret agreement with the Chinese Communist Party and make public its contents. Only then can the world see clearly the extent of the CCP’s repression — and the Church’s role in enabling it.

The disaster in China offers a painful reminder: While Christ is king and has conquered sin, Satan still rules the world (John 14:30). That truth remains central to Christian belief. It underscores man’s constant dependence on God — and Satan’s persistent effort to pull mankind away. In China’s repression of believers, its sponsorship of Islamic terrorism, its support for Iran’s nuclear program, and its vicious treatment of its own people, Satan’s fingerprints remain obvious and unhidden.

Catholics and all Christians should pray that Pope Leo XIV receives the grace to lead boldly and reject the globalist path of his predecessor. As an American, he might take inspiration from the words of Thomas Jefferson: “Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.” That counsel has never been more urgent. May the new pope heed it.

GOP Senators Helping Democrats Scandalize Signalgate Have No Clue What Time It Is

It's completely asinine for GOP senators to legitimize Democrat efforts to make Signalgate into the world-ending scandal that it's not.

Justin Trudeau resigns before his own party could throw him out



Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced Monday morning that he is stepping down as leader of the leftist Liberal Party of Canada ahead of its national caucus meeting on Wednesday. The announcement comes after years of scandals and after several weeks of his own party members calling for him to resign.

"I intend to resign as party leader, as prime minister after the party selects its next leader through a robust nationwide, competitive process," Trudeau told reporters outside his taxpayer-funded home at Rideau Cottage, doing his apparent best to smile.

"If I'm having to fight internal battles, I cannot be the best option," added the prime minister.

Trudeau told reporters that he asked Governor General Mary Simon to prorogue Parliament until March 24. State media indicated Simon granted the request.

Three sources, one of whom recently spoke to Trudeau, told the Globe and Mail on Sunday that the leftist leader felt compelled to make a voluntary exit before parliamentarians in his own party could force him out.

According to the Angus Reid Institute, Trudeau's disapproval rating was 74% and his approval rating was 22% as of Dec. 24. Upon assuming office in November 2015, the Liberal Party leader's approval rating was north of 60% and his disapproval rating was under 30%.

Trudeau's nine years in office have been marked by multiple blackface incidents and other personal scandals; tax hikes; an unprecedented influx of immigrants; a spike in illegal immigration; rising crime; an enormous federal deficit; unanswered church burnings; a housing crisis; coercive medicine; and the rise of state-facilitated suicide as a leading cause of death nationally.

While the Liberal Party wants to ditch Trudeau before the imminent federal election, it owns all of his failures — including his unlawful decision to use martial law in 2022 to crush the peaceful trucker protests — and it appears that Canadians are well aware.

A Dec. 27 Nanos Research poll indicated that a plurality of Canadians (40%) would prefer to see Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre as prime minister. Only 17.4% of respondents indicated they would like to see Trudeau carry on in the role. The Conservative Party leads with 47%. Even if the Liberal Party and socialist New Democratic Party resumed their coalition, they still would be a combined nine percentage points behind.

Nik Nanos, chief data scientist at the polling outfit, noted in a statement, "Conservative support hits a new long-term high with a 26-point advantage over the Liberals. This has occurred alongside calls for Trudeau to step down. Worry about jobs/the economy has also hit a new four-year high."

Sources told the Mail that Trudeau could have left immediately and had an interim leader, such as George Chahal of Alberta, take his place. Evidently, he wants to hold on to power a while longer.

Blaze News previously noted that among the people apparently jockeying for Trudeau's job are the leftist's foreign affairs minister, Mélanie Joly, who effectively auditioned last month for his job in the pages of the New York Times; Trudeau's deputy and former finance minister Chrystia Freeland, who recently abandoned her post after overseeing the growth of the federal deficit in 2023-24 to $61.9 billion; and former Bank of Canada Governor Mark Carney, who has been putting in calls with Liberal parliamentarians about running in a potential leadership race.

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

Kari Lake's opponent who dumped his pregnant wife may soon have his dirty laundry exposed



Rep. Ruben Gallego (D) is competing with Kari Lake for a U.S. Senate seat in Arizona. While recent polls show Gallego leading Lake by upward of 13 points, forthcoming revelations about the Democrat's murky past might help close the gap and deny him a future in the Senate.

The Washington Free Beacon filed a motion in January to unseal Gallego's 2017 divorce records, which were hidden from the public since he dumped his wife, Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego, when she was nine months pregnant.

The Arizona Supreme Court ruled Wednesday — days after Lake wrote, "Arizona deserves to know what he's hiding" — that the Democrat and his ex-wife can no longer keep their divorce records under wraps, which are now expected to come out before week's end.

The Free Beacon noted at the outset that something was unusual about the relatively heightened secrecy around the dissolution of Gallego's marriage:

Though both Ruben and Kate Gallego are public figures, public records and basic information on the internet about the circumstances of the divorce are scant, likely because the Gallegos or their allies have buried them. In Arizona, as in most states, court records—including those related to divorces—are generally accessible to the public. But in the Gallegos’ case, the entire docket is under seal, something incredibly unusual in a state where the sealing of information, if it happens at all, is typically limited to specific sensitive information.

The Free Beacon suggested further that the records were publicly relevant because both Gallegos held public office and Rep. Gallego had incorporated the divorce into his political backstory.

There was also the matter of where the couple filed for divorce.

While Arizona law requires that citizens file for divorce in that county where they presently live, the Free Beacon noted that the Gallegos lived in Maricopa County when they filed for divorce in Yavapai County.

The Gallegos resisted the push for transparency and fought to keep the records sealed.

'Congressman Gallego is not entitled to special privileges to secrecy in court records.'

The Yavapai County Superior Court agreed that the records should be unsealed but permitted the congressman an opportunity to propose redactions.

Superior Court Judge John Napper later rejected a number of Gallego's proposed redactions on July 3 and ordered that a version of the record be filed publicly.

Gallego, who told a fellow lawmaker "F*** your prayers" in 2022, appealed, claiming he and his ex-wife were seeking to protect their minor child. They secured a stay on July 30 from the state Court of Appeals. However, on Tuesday, the appellate court subsequently ordered that this stay be lifted on Oct. 17, prompting Gallego to seek the intervention of Arizona's Supreme Court.

The couple's lawyers suggested in their Tuesday motion to stay the appellate court's decision that the unsealing of the records would irreparably harm their privacy and safety rights.

According to the Tucson Star, the Free Beacon countered with a response stressing the Gallegos failed to meet the legal requirements to block the release of the file.

"That process will mean the media and the electorate get nothing from these presumptively public records until after all votes are cast," wrote Michael Edney, attorney for the Free Beacon. "That harm to the media and voters is time-sensitive and irreparable, starting a week ago with the commencement of early voting, a problem that will deepen each day until Nov. 5."

Edney added, "Congressman Gallego is not entitled to special privileges to secrecy in court records not afforded to other Arizona Citizens. If anything, the press and public have a heightened First Amendment interest in court records regarding public officials."

The Arizona Supreme Court unanimously rejected the couple's bid late Wednesday.

"The court concludes that the Gallegos have not established a strong likelihood of success on the merit," wrote Justice Clint Bolick. "Nor have they established irreparable harm with any degree of specificity if the stay is not granted."

Ahead of the unsealing, Rep. Gallego has been urging voters to turn in early ballots.

Early voting began in Arizona on Oct. 9.

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