Liz Warren hustles Trump with a housing bill from hell



What is it about the National Defense Authorization Act that makes it a dumping ground for every dumb liberal pet project?

First the Trump administration pushed an AI data-center amnesty that would have stripped states of authority over massive, power-hungry facilities. Then lawmakers tried to slip in Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s housing bill, a package built to subsidize Section 8 tenants and builders and to fuel the very forces driving the current housing bubble. After a backlash, both provisions came out of the NDAA. Now congressional leaders plan to pass the Massachusetts Democrat’s housing bill on its own.

The real crisis comes from government debt and the inflation it fuels. This is not a shortage of lumber or land. It is a monetary chokehold created by government policy.

Earlier this year, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott (R-S.C.) worked with Warren to move S. 2651, an omnibus housing package that expands every federal program Trump previously vowed to cut. They attached the legislation to the Senate’s NDAA, then lobbied House conservatives to adopt it in their version of the defense bill. At the last minute, House leaders stripped the language. The House Financial Services Committee now plans to mark up the bill next week.

Here’s the trouble: The bill misdiagnoses the housing crisis. It treats high prices as a supply shortage instead of a government-fueled asset bubble and inflationary pricing distortion.

The result is predictable. Its 40 provisions would expand Section 8, loan subsidies, “affordable housing” grants, and even looser mortgage programs for people priced out of the market. Every one of these items pours accelerant on the factors that drove the 2008 bubble and the post-COVID spike.

Government subsidies for overbuilding and for buyers who cannot afford homes created the crisis. Yet like a dog returning to its vomit, Scott, the president, and Senate Democrats are endorsing Warren’s 2020 campaign platform to revive the same model. The bill promises builders and activist groups federal cash in exchange for regulatory concessions. The trade-off is disastrous.

Section 202 creates a new federal grant program to fund local housing projects in designated zones — a warmed-over version of the community-engineering schemes Obama’s Department of Housing and Urban Development pushed a decade ago.

Meantime, Section 209 establishes a $200 million yearly fund at HUD to award “innovative housing reforms” to localities that reshape zoning to favor dense, subsidized units.

Conservatives would call these incentives an invitation to replicate failed urban policies in red suburbs. The bill rewards grifting nonprofits and community organizers who treat federal housing programs as political infrastructure.

At the same time, the administration is pushing rules that limit red-state zoning authority to clear the way for data-center construction while promoting Section 8 expansion with new incentives and zoning guidance. It revives, in effect, Obama’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing regime — the same racial-gerrymandering tool Trump killed in his first term. Supporting the Scott-Warren bill would revive it in practice.

Worse, the bill rests on a false premise. America doesn’t have a housing shortage. According to Redfin, as of October sellers outnumbered buyers by 36.8% — about 529,000 more sellers — the largest gap since 2013. Census data shows about 148 million housing units for roughly 134 million households, a surplus of around 14 million units. When Trump took office, the vacancy count stood near 11 million, yet prices were far more affordable.

The real crisis comes from government debt and the inflation it fuels. Construction costs surged with inflation. Interest rates spiked to service that debt, creating an interest-rate cliff that locked millions of homeowners into sub-3% mortgages. They cannot sell without doubling their monthly costs. High rates froze the existing inventory in place. This is not a shortage of lumber or land. It is a monetary chokehold created by government policy.

RELATED: Why the kids are not all right — and Boomers still pretend nothing’s wrong

Photo by Andrew Lichtenstein/Corbis via Getty Images

Federal housing policy adds another layer. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac long prioritized “access to credit” over price stability. By guaranteeing high-risk loans and encouraging low down payments, they allow buyers to bid more than their incomes justify. Subsidized credit lifts prices for sellers, not buyers.

S. 2651 makes the problem worse by expanding the Community Development Block Grant and similar programs, encouraging activist groups and corporate developers to overbuild units no one can afford without subsidies. That process pushes prices upward and strengthens corporate buy-ups of suburban neighborhoods.

The administration previously acknowledged these distortions. In Trump’s FY 2021 budget, the Office of Management and Budget proposed eliminating CDBG and the HOME Investment Partnerships Program, arguing that states and localities were better positioned to address affordability challenges. This new bill reverses that logic entirely.

The Federal Reserve’s rate whiplash — a decade of near-zero borrowing costs followed by sudden hikes — froze supply by trapping owners inside artificially cheap mortgages. Washington’s policies created the gridlock. The inventory exists. Monetary policy quarantined it.

What the administration needs to do is allow prices to fall back toward alignment with median incomes. That adjustment would restore affordability without new federal intervention. Instead, the FHFA is pushing lower credit-score requirements for subsidized mortgages. That mistake will repeat the pattern of enticing families into overpriced homes they cannot sustain.

Housing policy should stop trying to prop up inflated prices. The market must correct. A federal “solution” built around 40 expansionary programs will intensify the crisis, not solve it. Doing nothing would spur more affordability than this bipartisan blunder.

Cory Booker Obtains Female Wife in Boost to 2028 White House Bid

Cory Booker married a female woman over the weekend, closing the book on idle speculation about a man often described as "the Leonardo DiCaprio of American politics." The Democratic senator from New Jersey wed his recently acquired fiancée, Alexis Lewis, at an intimate ceremony in Washington, D.C., over the weekend. The move satisfies a major public relations need for Booker and arrives with exquisite timing as he prepares to launch his 2028 presidential campaign.

The post Cory Booker Obtains Female Wife in Boost to 2028 White House Bid appeared first on .

Senate Republicans Push Labor Reform As They Navigate Pro-Union Faction Of The MAGA Movement

Cassidy told reporters that the legislative package is not meant to 'tear up unions' or clash with the bills introduced by the Hawley, Moreno, and Marshall wing.

Major college fires worker after posts celebrating Charlie Kirk's assassination. It's just the tip of ugly leftist iceberg.



In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk's assassination last week, leftists far and wide who didn't like the words or politics of the TPUSA founder let loose on social media and celebrated Kirk's horrific death from a gunshot at an outdoor student event at Utah Valley University.

One of those anti-Kirk voices is a Clemson University employee — and the South Carolina public college suspended that unnamed worker Saturday.

'After being notified on Friday to stay out of the classroom, two faculty members now have been removed from their teaching duties pending investigation for termination.'

"Clemson University continues to thoroughly review the inappropriate social media content posted by employees in response to the tragic murder of Charlie Kirk," the school said in its Saturday statement. "As stated previously, the University will take decisive and appropriate action in cases where speech is not protected under the U.S. Constitution and the First Amendment."

The Post and Courier said assistant music professor Melvin Earl Villaver Jr. allegedly posted remarks about Kirk’s death. The paper noted in a separate story that one screenshot appearing to reference Kirk states, "Today was one of the most beautiful days ever."

U.S. Rep. Russell Fry (R-S.C.) was livid over the alleged posts and called out Villaver: "Celebrating Charlie Kirk's death is sick. What kind of depraved person thinks this is acceptable? Our tax dollars should not pay him another damn dime. I call on Clemson to fire him immediately!"

Screenshots included with Fry's takedown showed comments and retweets allegedly from Villaver saying:

  • "Racism and White Supremacy age you."
  • "Twitter after death."
  • "Can't speak in public no more. Think about the ramifications."

RELATED: Charlie Kirk hater goes nuclear on supporter of slain activist — then pays price after allegedly unleashing physical attacks

Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

Well, Clemson on Monday afternoon announced that "following an immediate and deliberate investigation into inappropriate social media content, Clemson today terminated an employee due to their social media posts." The school's statement did not name the employee or say what the posts were about.

The Post and Courier said Villaver could not be reached for comment; the X account @MelvinEarlMusic — from which the paper said his alleged remarks and reposts were cited — now "doesn't exist."

But WHNS-TV reported that Clemson called a special Board of Trustees meeting scheduled for Monday afternoon after facing backlash over comments believed to be made by some employees and professors about Kirk’s death.

The paper, citing a university spokesperson, reported that the remarks attributed to Villaver were not the only ones to draw criticism.

Indeed, the school's Monday statement on X added the following: "After being notified on Friday to stay out of the classroom, two faculty members now have been removed from their teaching duties pending investigation for termination."

Prior to the firing announcement, U.S. Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) wrote the following X post: "Your First Amendment rights do not include a right to a job! Clemson's professors were completely inappropriate. The vile and disgusting celebration of a murder must compel the university to take clear and immediate action."

U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) also called on Clemson to commence firings: "Free speech doesn't prevent you from being fired if you're stupid and have poor judgement. The despicable, inappropriate and classless statements about a tragic event should not diminish a great university like @ClemsonUniv. However, in my opinion, those who made these despicable, inappropriate and classless statements should be good candidates for termination by this public university."

RELATED: Professor who shared vile response to Kirk's assassination receives lesson about consequences: 'Sick people'

As readers of Blaze News are no doubt aware, the number of reports about people from all walks of life spouting off inappropriate comments about Charlie Kirk's assassination seem to be piling up at an astronomical rate.

What's more, it doesn't seem to be ending well for many of them:

  • The U.S. Secret Service put an agent on leave and revoked his security clearance after he ripped Kirk following his assassination, CBS News reported, adding that Anthony Pough wrote in a Facebook post Wednesday that Kirk "spewed hate and racism on his show ... at the end of the day, you answer to GOD, and speak things into existence. You can only circumvent karma, she doesn't leave."
  • American Airlines pilots who celebrated Kirk's assassination were grounded and removed from duty, Fox News reported, citing U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, who posted on X that "this behavior is disgusting and they should be fired. Any company responsible for the safety of the traveling public cannot tolerate that behavior. We heal as a country when we send the message that glorifying political violence is COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE!"
  • A Virginia public school teacher was placed on administrative leave following an anti-Kirk post on Facebook that allegedly read, “I hope he suffered through all of it," WAVY-TV reported.

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

CBS tries using Christ against MAGA Christian — but it backfires big-time



The legacy media's double standard for Christian politicians was on full display last week.

Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) is a lawmaker known for speaking openly about his Christian faith. Last week, he appeared on "CBS Mornings Plus" to promote his new book, "One Nation Always Under God: Profiles in Christian Courage." But instead of asking about the book, CBS News anchor Adriana Diaz chose to challenge the legitimacy of Scott's faith with a now-familiar line of attack.

The faith test becomes just another political weapon — one wielded not to clarify the truth but to embarrass political opponents.

"As a practicing Christian, how do you reconcile your support for President Trump when many people see his actions as lacking Christian values?" Diaz asked.

It's the same question we've heard repeatedly asked of Trump-supporting Christians, and, to his credit, Scott did not flinch.

But the question reveals something much bigger than Scott, Trump, or even the Republican Party. It exposes the media's asymmetrical "faith test" — one applied rigorously to Trump-supporting conservatives but never to Democrats.

Faith on trial

The question itself is a rhetorical sleight of hand. It implies that supporting Trump is inherently anti-Christian and that real Christianity is whatever Trump isn't. By that logic, Scott stands guilty until proven innocent.

But the problem isn't just the question. It's the blatant double standard.

If it's fair to interrogate Tim Scott on whether his support for President Trump squares with the teachings of Jesus, then surely it's fair game to press professing Christian Democrats on whether the policies and people they support align with Christian theology and ethics, right?

Except that almost never happens.

When was the last time a news anchor interrogated a Democrat — like former President Joe Biden, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), or Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), for instance — on how the support for abortion comports with 2,000 years of unambiguous Christian teachings about protecting innocent life, especially of the unborn?

Has any Democrat, for that matter, been grilled on whether endorsing the LGBTQ agenda — including radical trans procedures for children — is consistent with biblical ethics?

If such questions have been asked of Democrats, they've gone unnoticed, which is telling because these aren't minor theological quibbles. They're fundamental biblical issues, and Christianity has been clear-eyed about them for thousands of years.

Tested, then twisted

Diaz's question reveals an underlying assumption: that Christianity naturally aligns with progressive politics.

That's why journalists feel compelled to question Trump-supporting Christians about the congruency of their politics and theology, but never think to challenge a Democrat for supporting policies that clearly contradict Christian orthodoxy and biblical teaching. It's because they don't recognize or perceive the obvious inconsistency.

This double standard is as dangerous as it is subversive.

It redefines Christianity in the public imagination, not as an ancient faith with its own transcendent moral authority, but as a soft and therapeutic set of values (i.e., tolerance, inclusion, "compassion"), conveniently shaped to match the political priorities of the left.

RELATED: How the liberal media twists 'church and state' to hide what it truly fears

The media isn't actually interested in theological nuance or serious conversations about faith and politics. Their agenda is clear: to police the boundaries of acceptable public religion.

And in their eyes, supporting Trump is a grave sin.

If journalists truly believe that public officials should be held accountable to the moral standards of their faith, that's fine. But that standard must be applied equally. You can't grill Republicans for supporting Trump but never interrogate Democrats championing abortion, the LGBTQ agenda, and the destruction of the traditional family.

Otherwise, the "faith test" becomes just another political weapon — one wielded not to clarify the truth but to embarrass political opponents who dissent from the liberal consensus.

Sacred spin shattered

If the press were honest and intellectually serious, they would apply the faith test fairly.

It would look something like this:

  • Mr. Biden, as a Catholic, how do you reconcile Roman Catholic teaching on the sanctity of life with your support for abortion?
  • Mrs. Pelosi, how does your Christian faith inform your views on marriage and family policy?
  • Mr. Warnock, how do you interpret biblical passages on protecting vulnerable life in light of your support for abortion and the trans agenda?

These aren't "gotcha" questions. They're parallel to what Scott faced last week — only aimed in the other direction. And if politicians can't answer these questions without spin and deflection, that would tell us something important.

Scott handled himself with grace and focus. But Trump-supporting Republicans shouldn't be the only side forced to reconcile their faith and politics on the public stage. If the media wants to play referee on Christian consistency, they need to enforce the rules on both sides.

Fairness — and honesty — demands equal scrutiny.

Anything less is not journalism. It's partisanship dressed up as moral concern, and it's why Americans no longer trust the mainstream press.

Diaz tried to weaponize Christ against Scott and MAGA Christians. But the shot backfired, exposing yet another double standard in the media.

RIP Democracy: Glenn Kessler, Bravest Fact-Checker in Journalism History, Exits WaPo After Taking Buyout

The world's gone dark. Democracy is dead. The haunting sound of Pinocchio's (facial) castration, the shears of Satan snapping shut, the skirl of fascist glee, will echo in eternity.

The post RIP Democracy: Glenn Kessler, Bravest Fact-Checker in Journalism History, Exits WaPo After Taking Buyout appeared first on .

With WaPo Exit, Pinocchio-Wielding Propagandist Glenn Kessler Leaves Behind More Fiction Than Fact

[rebelmouse-proxy-image https://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Screenshot-2025-07-28-at-12.56.32 PM-scaled-e1753725488843-1200x675.png crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Screenshot-2025-07-28-at-12.56.32%5Cu202fPM-scaled-e1753725488843-1200x675.png%22%7D" expand=1]Time and time again, Kessler has offended Americans and the First Amendment principle of a free press with his activism.

Lara Trump sits out on swing state Senate bid to replace Thom Tillis



As the 2026 primaries begin to take shape, one swing state in particular has remained on the GOP's radar.

After Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina announced his retirement in June, all eyes turned to Tar Heel State native Lara Trump. Although the Republican nomination would have undoubtedly been hers to claim, Lara passed on the opportunity to scoop up the Senate bid.

'Despite Cooper's popularity in the purple state, Republicans have maintained a steady winning streak in North Carolina.'

Republican National Committee Chair Michael Whatley, who previously co-chaired the RNC alongside Lara Trump, will instead be running for the North Carolina Senate seat, reportedly with President Donald Trump's blessing.

Although neither candidate has issued a formal announcement, Whatley is expected to face off against former Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper.

RELATED: Exclusive: Congress pushes bipartisan bill preventing Mexico's 'illegal seizure' of American assets

Photo by Melissa Sue Gerrits/Getty Images

Despite Cooper's popularity in the purple state, Republicans have maintained a steady winning streak there. Since 1990, Democrats have won only two terms to represent North Carolina in the Senate. Since 1980, the swing state also voted for a Democratic presidential candidate only one time — in 2008, when former President Barack Obama was on the ticket.

RELATED: Vance casts tiebreaking vote to advance DOGE cuts after Republicans defy Trump

One GOP operative told Blaze News that Republican Sen. Tim Scott (S.C.), who chairs the National Republican Senatorial Committee, had previously met with Whatley to discuss a potential Senate bid. The NRSC has also been floating Whatley as a potential candidate since January, and internal polling has indicated that a "pro-Trump Republican" would be the strongest candidate, according to the GOP operative.

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