The biggest fraud scandal in America? JD Vance says it’s worse than you think.



Vice President JD Vance revealed just how much taxpayer money is lost to fraud across America — and it’s more than you think.

“We’ve referred over $22 billion in fraudulent small business loans back to the Treasury for collection. We deferred more than $1.3 billion in fraudulent Medicaid reimbursements that were coming from various states, particularly California,” Vance explained.

The Trump administration has also “put a six-month hold on enrollments for new hospice and home health care providers” due to a large amount of fraud uncovered in hospices all over the country.

“We’ve recovered taxpayer funds from the $135 billion stolen after the floodgates were opened in the immediate aftermath of COVID. We have found $6.3 billion in suspected fraudulent government contracts which were mostly awarded during the last administration, and that has stopped,” Vance continued.


“And finally, we’ve blocked $60 million in student aid fraud that should have gone to young people trying to get an education, but instead were going to fraudsters,” he added.

“JD Vance is doing his darndest to try to clean up the fraud situation in America,” BlazeTV host Pat Gray comments. “We’ve got all the Somali fraud. We’ve got fraud in California. We’ve got fraud, I’m sure, in every state, but it’s really really rampant in some more than others.”

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller also commented on the huge amount of fraud, explaining that American systems were “set up based on the honor system.”

“They’re set up based on the idea that you could trust the average person, through their own morality, to abide by the rules and comply with the law,” he said, before championing Vance’s efforts to tackle fraud.

“Because of the vice president’s leadership, you are seeing the most muscular, robust, aggressive, dedicated, determined, and speedy effort to shut down criminal fraud that has not only ever occurred in the history of this country, but in any developed nation,” he said.

“Thank you,” Gray comments.

Want more from Pat Gray?

To enjoy more of Pat's biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Report: State Medicaid Payments Explode As Fraud Scandals Grow

Open the Books' investigation found Pennsylvania saw Medicaid payments soar from $5.6 million to $583 million over seven years.

Trump administration sends Democrats into hysterics by freezing funding to 5 blue states over fraud concerns



President Donald Trump told reporters on Sunday that those responsible for the historic fraud in Minnesota — members of the Somali community in particular — aren't just ripping off the Gopher State but the country at large.

"Think of it: $19 billion at least they've stolen from Minnesota and from the United States," said Trump.

"We're not going to pay it any more. We're going to have [Gov. Tim] Walz go pay. We're not going to pay them, and we're not going to pay California, and we're not going to pay Illinois."

In the wake of the president's remarks, the Trump administration cut off five Democrat-run states' access to over $10 billion in federal child care and family assistance funds.

'It's a giant scam.'

On Tuesday, the Department of Health and Human Services announced that it had barred California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, and New York from accessing nearly $2.4 billion in Child Care and Development Fund money; $7.35 billion in Temporary Assistance for Needy Family funds; and $869 million in Social Services Block Grant funds.

"Families who rely on child care and family assistance programs deserve confidence that these resources are used lawfully and for their intended purpose," HHS Deputy Secretary Jim O'Neill said in a statement. "This action reflects our commitment to program integrity, fiscal responsibility, and compliance with federal requirements."

HHS Assistant Secretary Alex Adams, the head of the Administration for Children and Families, emphasized the government's responsibility to "ensure these programs serve the families they were created to help," adding that "when there are credible concerns about fraud or misuse, we will act."

RELATED: Tim Walz's nightmare continues as HHS shuts off $185M to Minnesota amid allegedly 'fake' Somali day care centers

Photo by Mandel NGAN/AFP via Getty Images

HHS indicated that the funding freeze will remain in place until the ACF completes a review and determines that the affected states are in compliance with federal requirements.

'It's cruel.'

Adams and O'Neill also announced on Tuesday that the Trump administration is ending Biden-era practices of providing child-care centers with payments up front without verifying attendance.

Democrats melted down over the funding pause, characterizing the effort to ensure taxpayer dollars aren't siphoned away by fraudsters as an attack on children.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, whose state has seen its share of day-care fraud, said in response to the funding freeze, "It's vindictive. It's cruel. And we'll fight it with every fiber of our being."

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) tried downplaying the fraud, claiming that "this has nothing to do with fraud and everything to do with political retribution that punishes poor children in need of assistance."

"Rather than making life easier and more affordable for our families, Donald Trump is stripping away child care from Illinois families who are just trying to go to work," said Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D). "Thousands of parents and children depend on these child-care programs to help them make ends meet, and now their livelihoods are being put at risk."

Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet, a Democrat with aspirations of becoming his state's next governor, tweeted, "Donald Trump has declared war on Colorado. He is now robbing thousands of vulnerable Colorado families of the critical support they need to afford food, housing, and health care."

Trump raised the matter of fraud in Minnesota during a New Year's Eve event, then noted that "California is worse, Illinois is worse, and, sadly, New York is worse. A lot of other places. We're going to get to the bottom of all of it. It's a giant scam."

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

Chicago Bears may leave city over rift with Democrat leadership



The Chicago Bears are looking for a new stadium and that may end up leading them out of Chicago.

In fact, they could leave the state of Illinois all together.

'Suggesting the Bears would move to Indiana is a startling slap in the face.'

Kevin Warren, Bears president and CEO, says the Bears need a new stadium because the current Soldier Field is now more than 100 years old. For several years, different ideas for nearby new or domed stadiums have been proposed, but the city has not signaled it would fund a project that would cost billions of dollars.

Some estimates, in fact, say a new stadium would cost $2 billion alone — with many more billions required for surrounding infrastructure, roads, and entertainment.

In September, Warren penned a letter saying that Arlington Heights, a suburb of Chicago, "is the only site" that meets the required standards to build a new facility and "elevated gameday experience."

While the organization said it was willing to contribute $2 billion to the move, Warren also wrote that the Bears would continue to look elsewhere for appropriate building sites, "including Northwest Indiana."

The governor's office responded to the letter in a statement to WGN-TV, effectively saying that a private business like the Bears needs to pay for its own infrastructure.

"Suggesting the Bears would move to Indiana is a startling slap in the face to all the beloved and loyal fans who have been rallying around the team during this strong season," said Matt Hill, spokesperson for Gov. JB Pritzker (D). "The governor's a Bears fan who has always wanted them to stay in Chicago. He has also said that ultimately they are a private business."

RELATED: Illinois governor signs law to counter Trump administration's 'depravity' — DHS fires back immediately

Brian Cassella/Chicago Tribune/Tribune News Service via Getty Images

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson (D) was less harsh in his wording while also dismissing any idea that the Bears could move out of state.

"I'm going to keep a straight face here: The Bears belong in the city of Chicago," the mayor said. "I've said repeatedly the door is open for conversations. ... I firmly believe [the Bears'] best position is in the city of Chicago."


The village of Arlington Heights also issued a statement, saying that after hearing about a possible move to Northwest Indiana, village leaders remained confident that their area is "the best option for their new stadium and entertainment district."

The leaders added, "However, we understand their need to explore any and all viable locations as part of their due diligence process. Due to restrictive legislation in Illinois, this exploration now includes moving to Indiana."

While the lack of public funding for the Bears may be heartbreaking for fans, the rejection of tax dollars being injected into sports franchises has been an increasing trend in recent years.

RELATED: 'We're still on the air, Tim': Hockey announcer's hot mic sexual remarks result in suspension

Photo by Jerry Driendl/Getty Images

In 2024, voters in Missouri rejected a proposed sales tax measure that would have funded new stadiums for both the Kansas City Chiefs (NFL) and the Kansas City Royals (MLB).

The Chiefs were asking for $500 million from taxpayers while forking over $300 million of its own funds. The Royals needed $2 billion for a sports district and were asking to split the bill 50/50. But voters rejected the calls for funding, according to Sports Illustrated.

In 2023, the Arizona Coyotes (NHL) asked for $200 million of a $2.1 billion plan to be paid by residents. The entertainment centrum would have included a new arena, two hotels, a 3,500-person theater, and up to 1,995 residential units. According to ESPN, the vote failed with 56% saying "no," and the Coyotes moved their team to Utah.

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

Bill Would Stop Giving Federal Handouts To Cities That Obstruct Immigration Law Enforcement

Sanctuary cities bar local police from helping ICE and other federal law enforcement officials with immigration-related operations.

Trump admin reveals extent of planned USAID cuts — which will save America a fortune



The U.S. State Department confirmed Wednesday that the Trump administration is eliminating thousands of foreign assistance awards and grants at the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Peter Marocco, brought in by Secretary of State Marco Rubio to help run USAID, said in a statement to the federal district court presiding over two consolidated lawsuits brought against the administration by aid organizations that following a review, Secretary of State Marco Rubio decided to cut roughly 92% of the agency's grants, reported NPR.

According to a State Department memo reviewed by the Washington Free Beacon, the 92% figure reflects 5,800 grants valued at $54 billion at USAID that Trump administration officials are set to terminate. Auditors scrutinized over 9,100 more grants at the State Department, 4,100 of which — valued at $4.4 billion — are slated for elimination.

'Continuing this program is not in the national interest.'

"USAID evaluated 6,200 multi-year awards with $58.2 billion in value remaining," a State Department spokesman said in a statement to Axios. "Nearly 5,800 awards with $54 billion in value remaining were identified for elimination as part of the America First agenda."

In terms of awards that survived the cuts, roughly 500 at USAID and 2,700 at the State Department will remain.

Contractors learned of the award and grant terminations in a memo from USAID's office of acquisition and assistance. A copy of the memo obtained by NPR stated that Rubio and Marocco "have determined your award is not aligned with Agency priorities and made a determination that continuing this program is not in the national interest."

President Donald Trump noted in an aid-freezing executive order on his first day in office that the "foreign aid industry and bureaucracy are not aligned with American interests and in many cases antithetical to American values."

He further indicated that it would be the "policy of United States that no further United States foreign assistance shall be disbursed in a manner that is not fully aligned with the foreign policy of the President of the United States."

In turn, the State Department ordered a freeze on new funding for virtually all U.S. foreign assistance on Jan. 24.

Following a pair of lawsuits by aid organizations, a Biden judge issued a restraining order, requiring that the funding be released.

The U.S. Supreme Court temporarily blocked U.S. District Judge Amir H. Ali's restraining order Wednesday evening.

In addition to eliminating awards and grants to wasteful programs — for instance, USAID previously blew $45 million on DEI scholarships in Burma, $2 million on sex-change activism in Guatemala, and $20 million for a "Sesame Street" show in Iraq — the Trump administration has placed all personnel at USAID "with the exception of designated personnel responsible for mission-critical functions, core leadership and/or specially designated programs" on administrative leave and is firing 1,600 positions at the agency that are presently occupied.

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

Blaze News investigates: Sparing taxpayers from funding leftist propaganda



National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service are kept afloat with the help of taxpayer dollars. NPR has gone so far as to claim that "federal funding is essential to public radio's service to the American public and its continuation is critical for both stations and program producers, including NPR."

The media outfits' unmistakable ideological bias and imbalanced coverage in recent decades have prompted a steady stream of calls to defund both organizations or perhaps even to close the fountainhead of most of their taxpayer funding, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting — a move that would require lawmakers to revisit the Communications Act of 1934 and its amendments.

Following the re-election of President Donald Trump, who has characterized NPR as a scam and whose first administration sought to cut funding for the CPB, there has been mounting pressure both to ascertain whether NPR, PBS, and their respective member stations have violated federal bylaws and to spare American taxpayers from having to bankroll leftist propaganda.

Blaze News reviewed the media outfits' recent history of partisan hackery and reached out to a top critic of public broadcasting as well as to lawmakers involved in holding the taxpayer-funded media outfits accountable. It appears that to ensure no partisan media outfit is subsidized at taxpayers' expense, the government may have to get out of the business of public broadcasting altogether.

Funding

NPR, a beneficiary of National Endowment for the Arts grants, claims that less than 1% of its annual operating budget comes in the form of grants directly from the CPB — which has an operating budget of $545 million for fiscal year 2025 — and other federal sources.

The outfit, which operates as a syndicator to a network of well over 1,000 public radio stations, has acknowledged, however, that multitudes of public radio stations that receive grants directly from the CPB use the funds to "pay NPR and other public radio producers for their programming."

According to consolidated financial statements, the organization secured over $96.1 million in "core and other programming fees" in 2023, $93.2 million in 2022, $90.4 million in in 2021, and $92.5 million in 2020.

"These station programming fees are one of NPR's primary sources of revenue," noted the media outfit. "The loss of federal funding would undermine the stations' ability to pay NPR for programming, thereby weakening the institution."

Like NPR, public TV stations that receive CPB funding pay significant programming dues to PBS.

According to the public TV broadcaster, its flagship "News Hour" program, for instance, receives roughly 35% of its "annual funding/budget from CPB and PBS via national programming funds — a combination of CPB appropriation funds and annual programming dues paid to PBS by stations re-allocated to programs like ours."

A spokesman for PBS, which has over 330 member television stations, recently indicated that the organization receives 16% of its funding directly from the federal government each year.

Propaganda

While neither NPR nor PBS has done a good job hiding its political leanings, Uri Berliner, a Peabody Award-winning senior business editor who worked at NPR for 25 years, helped shine a spotlight last year on just how slanted public broadcasting has become, slamming NPR specifically in an opinion piece for mindlessly advancing Democratic propaganda and altogether giving up on journalistic independence.

Berliner, the son of an LGBT activist and a grandson of Holocaust victims, made clear at the outset he was no rightist, characterizing himself instead as something akin to the stereotypical NPR listener, "an EV-driving, Wordle-playing, tote bag-carrying coastal elite."

While acknowledging the media outfit’s long-standing "liberal bent," Berliner noted that NPR had effectively transformed into a Democratic propaganda machine, working vigorously to "damage or topple Trump's presidency," in part by "hitch[ing] our wagon to Trump's most visible antagonist, Representative Adam Schiff," and amplifying the Russia collusion hoax.

Berliner — who discovered that 87% of NPR’s Washington, D.C., editors and reporters were registered Democrats and that none were registered as Republicans — hammered NPR further for gaslighting Americans about the likely origins of COVID-19, for turning a blind eye to the Hunter Biden laptop scandal and its characterization of the damning story as a "pure distraction," and over its obsession with race.

While NPR's objectivity had been criticized for decades, Berliner suggested that "independent journalism" at the company really began to slip under former CEO John Lansing, who apparently used George Floyd's death as an excuse to center race and identity in everything the company did while eliminating any remaining "viewpoint diversity."

Berliner indicated that things worsened under the current CEO, Katherine Maher, a longtime BLM supporter who previously helped transform Wikipedia into a repository of leftist propaganda, publicly stated, "Donald Trump is a racist," and suggested that "our reverence for the truth might be a distraction that is getting in the way of finding common ground and getting things done."

After Maher said that Berliner had been "profoundly disrespectful, hurtful, and demeaning" for daring to question the neutrality and integrity of taxpayer-funded propagandists, NPR suspended him. The journalist resigned shortly thereafter.

PBS may not have a Berliner-caliber whistleblower to call its own, but it is certainly no better.

The Media Research Center conducted a study from June 1, 2023, to Nov. 30, 2024, analyzing political labels used by anchors, reporters, and contributors on PBS' "News Hour." PBS staff apparently threw around the term "far right" or some variation thereof 162 times but used the term "far left" only six times.

Reporters reflexively deemed social conservatives and Trump-adjacent Republicans as "extreme" or "extremists."

'I understand the importance of nonpartisan, balanced media coverage.'

While numerous reporters and guests liberally applied the "fascist" label to Trump or his polices, PBS reportedly clamped down on characterizations of failed presidential candidate Kamala Harris and other Democrats as Marxists or communists, writing them off as "slurs."

In another study published last year, the MRC tallied every comment made by PBS journalists during the Republican and Democratic national conventions. Of the 191 minutes of PBS commentary on the Republican National Convention, 72% of opinionated comments were reportedly negative and only 28% were positive.

For instance, when it came to the RNC, "News Hour" co-anchor Amna Nawaz exhibited no pretense of neutrality, accusing Republicans of "echoing some white supremacist notions" and veering "into outright racism."

The DNC coverage was a different story altogether. Not only did PBS air more speeches and footage from the Democratic convention than for the Republican convention, the co-anchors salivated over the speakers.

Geoff Bennett said that the "elevation and evolution" of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) was "so striking because she has found a way to blend populism and pragmatism and blend protest and power."

Not to be outdone by her co-anchor's fawning over AOC, Nawaz stated, "We know we're hearing a lot of this messaging around the joyful warriors that are Harris and Walz, which is really a stark contrast to what we saw on the Republican side."

Defunding

There have been numerous efforts in recent years to defund NPR, defund PBS, and/or shutter the CPB.

Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas), for instance, took aim at both NPR and PBS with a bill in March 2023 titled the No Partisan Radio and Partisan Broadcasting Services Act. By the following year, the bill had 13 co-sponsors but did not go the distance.

Jackson noted that whereas at the time of the media outfits' initial receipt of federal funds, the understanding was that their content "would remain unbiased and benefit every American," it has become "obvious that NPR and PBS have abandoned their founding principles."

Following Berliner's suspension, Republican lawmakers narrowed their focus and pushed multiple bills aimed specifically at kneecapping NPR.

Rep. Claudia Tenney (R-N.Y.), for instance, introduced the Defund NPR Act of 2024, a piece of legislation co-sponsored by 16 other Republicans that would have prohibited federal funding to NPR or to any successor organization.

"As a former newspaper owner and publisher, I understand the importance of nonpartisan, balanced media coverage and have seen firsthand the left-wing bias in our news media," Tenney said at the time. "NPR is using American taxpayer dollars to manipulate the news and lie to the American people on behalf of a political agenda."

Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, tried something different in December, introducing the No Propaganda Act, which would amend the Communications Act of 1934 to prohibit federal funding for the CPB. Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) introduced a corresponding bill in the House.

Kennedy cast doubt on whether the over $15 billion already blown by Congress on the CPB has actually gone toward satisfying the organization's stated goal of educating, informing, fostering curiosity, and promoting civil discourse essential to American society, suggesting that instead it has merely bankrolled "Big Brother's propaganda outlet."

"The Corporation for Public Broadcasting refuses to provide Louisianans and Americans with fair, unbiased content," said Kennedy. "It wastes taxpayer dollars on slanted coverage to advance a leftist political agenda."

Mike Gonzalez, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation who has long written about the need to defund public broadcasting, emphasized to Blaze News that given the option of whether to defund the propaganda outfits or to defund the CPB altogether, the latter choice is optimal, although he'd personally seek to go farther.

Gonzalez, who indicated that no attempt at mending could justify keeping taxpayers on the hook for public broadcasting, said that Kennedy "going after the CPB is the right approach."

"I would prefer dissolving it," continued Gonzalez. "You can defund the CPB, but that only delays the problem. That's not a permanent solution."

'For my own part, I do not see a reason why Congress should continue sending taxpayer dollars to NPR and PBS.'

While Gonzalez anticipates that the liberal media will continue to circle the wagons and gripe over the potential loss of taxpayer cash to fellow travelers, he suggested that those open to defunding public broadcasting should not lose sight of NPR's and PBS' long-standing efforts to antagonize at least half the population..

"My liberal friends say, 'Look, this is important. We need more journalism, not less journalism.' I don’t, first of all, think [NPR and PBS] are going to go away, but if they go away, I don’t care," said Gonzalez. "Second of all, you have to know what they're doing."

Gonzalez noted that NPR and PBS "gave up any attempt at appearing impartial or objective in any way," adding that in the case of NPR, the choice of Maher as CEO was a crystal-clear message that things won't soon change for the better.

"Maher, on the record, is calling Trump racist. She was an enthusiastic supporter of Kamala Harris," said Gonzalez. "She's on the record as saying the First Amendment and our obsession with truth is getting in the way of consensus. Well, gee — that's the CEO of NPR. Anything else you need to know?"

Neither NPR nor PBS responded to Blaze News' request for comment by deadline.

Comeuppance

There is clearly blood in the water.

The Federal Communications Commission has public broadcasting in its sights, as does the new House Oversight Delivering on Government Efficiency subcommittee, which is chaired by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.).

On Jan. 29, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr announced that the commission's enforcement bureau was opening an investigation into the airing of NPR and PBS programming across their various broadcast member stations.

Carr expressed concern that the two media outfits might be in violation of federal law by airing commercials. While apparently concerned that NPR and PBS member stations might be testing the boundaries of their federal noncommercial authorizations, Carr made no secret that the investigation could furnish lawmakers with further justification to pull the plug on the whole project.

"Congress is actively considering whether to stop requiring taxpayers to subsidize NPR and PBS programming," wrote Carr. "For my own part, I do not see a reason why Congress should continue sending taxpayer dollars to NPR and PBS, given the changes in the media marketplace since the passage of the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967."

'We shouldn't be taxing the American people to fund radically left-wing propaganda.'

"To the extent that these taxpayer dollars are being used to support a for-profit endeavor or an entity that is airing commercial advertisements, then that would further undermine any case for continuing to fund NPR and PBS with taxpayer dollars," added Carr.

On Feb. 3, Greene invited the CEOs from NPR and PBS to testify at a hearing in March regarding their biased news coverage. Both Katherine Maher and Paula Kerger were notified that the hearing constitutes an opportunity to explain why they feel they deserve to continue receiving federal funds.

The subcommittee said in a release, "NPR and PBS have repeatedly undermined public trust by ignoring stories that were damaging to the Biden administration, dismissing genuine calls for balanced reporting, and pushing partisan coverage. As stewards of tax dollars, NPR and PBS have an obligation to provide objective and accurate coverage that serves all Americans."

When asked about the perceived need to defund NPR and PBS and the significance of doing so, a spokesman for Greene told Blaze News that the congresswoman "is looking forward to the hearing and questioning the heads of these publicly funded media outlets, and her letters speak for themselves."

In Greene's letters to the CEOs of the liberal media outfits, she noted on both occasions that as organizations that receive federal funds through their member stations, they should provide reporting that serves "the entire public, not just a narrow slice of like-minded individuals and ideological interest groups."

When asked about the prospect of defunding NPR and PBS or dissolving the CPB altogether, Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas), a member of the DOGE subcommittee, told Blaze News in a statement, "I fully support defunding these organizations and am exploring legislative options to ensure public funds are spent responsibly."

"We shouldn't be taxing the American people to fund radically left-wing propaganda," continued Gill. "Nothing about NPR or PBS is neutral, and taxpayers shouldn’t be forced to bankroll news organizations that hate them and everything they stand for."

While NPR appears set in its ways, PBS — having seen the writing on the wall — appears eager to placate some of its harshest critics by doing the bare minimum: its lawful obligation.

A PBS spokesman confirmed to the Hollywood Reporter on Feb. 10 that the organization had shuttered its race-obsessed DEI office in order to comply with President Donald Trump's executive order "ending radical and wasteful government DEI programs and preference."

"The staff members who served in that office are leaving PBS. We will continue to adhere to our mission and values. PBS will continue to reflect all of America and remain a welcoming place for everyone," the spokesman said in a statement.

While it was apparently easy to shutter the DEI office and kick to the curb Cecilia Loving, the organization's senior vice president of DEI, eliminating political bias at PBS and NPR would be a herculean feat with no promise of a lasting solution.

When condemning the use of taxpayer funds for public broadcasting during the first Trump administration, Mike Gonzalez appealed to Thomas Jefferson to help make his point, quoting the third president as saying, "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagations of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical.

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

DOGE Is Deadly To The Swamp And A Ray Of Light For The American Taxpayer

We’re getting a much better look at the cancer killing this republic. The DOGE is proving to be a pretty powerful MRI.

Time magazine tries defending Harris by fact-checking Trump — then forced into all-time correction



During Tuesday's debate, President Donald Trump said that Kamala Harris "wants to do transgender operations on illegal aliens that are in prison," adding, "This is a radical left liberal that would do this."

The liberal media dutifully rushed to defend the vice president, claiming that Trump's assertion was false — which it is not. In doing so, misleading publications like the New Yorker not only drew greater attention to Harris' desire to mutilate illegal aliens' genitals using taxpayer money, but to their own propagandic nature.

Time magazine, another publication whose writers evidently underestimated Harris' radicalism, was among the offenders. Confronted with the truth of Trump's claim, it had to issue an embarrassing correction Wednesday.

'The truth was too crazy for the fact checkers.'

On Monday, CNN's investigative outfit KFile unearthed an American Civil Liberties Union questionnaire completed in 2019 by then-Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), which revealed several of Harris' extreme positions and goals.

Harris indicated that she supported the decriminalization of all drug possession for personal use; statehood for Washington, D.C.; the repeal of the Hyde Amendment; ending illegal alien detention facilities; and cutting Immigration and Customs Enforcement funding.

Harris also vowed to ensure that "federal prisoners and detainees are able to obtain medically necessary care for gender transition, including surgical care, while incarcerated or detained."

Time magazine, which has previously concern-mongered about "disinformation" and "fake news," originally reported:

The former President repeated a baseless Internet rumor that migrant invaders were killing and eating pet dogs and cats in Springfield, Ohio, and falsely claimed that Harris 'wants to do transgender operations on illegal aliens in prison.'

The publication has since updated the article to read:

Trump glowered and grimaced, spewing old grievances and strange new attacks. The former President repeated a baseless Internet rumor that migrant invaders were killing and eating pet dogs and cats in Springfield, Ohio, and claimed that Harris 'wants to do transgender operations on illegal aliens in prison.'

The latest version contains a corrective note at the very bottom admitting that Time's original story "mischaracterized as false Donald Trump's statement accusing Kamala Harris of supporting 'transgender operations on illegal aliens in prison.'"

"As a presidential candidate in 2019, Harris filled out a questionnaire saying she supported taxpayer-funded gender transition treatment for detained immigrants," added Time's correction.

Donald Trump Jr. noted on X, "Unreal."

Former presidential candidate and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy said, "Turns out the truth was too crazy for the fact checkers."

Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk tweeted, "Kamala, TIME, and ABC collectively got owned on one simple, easily confirmed fact-check. This is fantastic."

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