In 1986, the federal government built a computer database called SAVE, Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements. The purpose was simple – when a noncitizen applies for public benefits the state govt can check whether the applicant was legally in the country. The SAVE system worked. Nobody talked about it for 39 years.

In March 2025, President Trump signed an executive order expanding SAVE’s use. The order told DHS to use the SAVE system to verify citizenship of registered voters and people registering to vote. The order instructed the Social Security Administration to share its records with DHS for that purpose.

Two months later, DHS launched the modified version. Two changes: (1) it now checks Social Security numbers against SSA databases. (2) it allows state and local authorities to run bulk searches; the entire voter roll at once.

Blue states sued. Slowly the cases went through the lower courts, then the appellate courts, until finally the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 the SAVE system can be used in the midterm election [RULING HERE]. “While the ruling gives the Department of Homeland Security authority to use the database ahead of the midterms, the court’s conservative majority noted that the impact of the ruling was blunted by another federal law — the National Voter Registration Act — which prohibits states from purging voters within 90 days of the election.” {ABC link}

If the states use the SAVE system, but do not purge their voter rolls for 2026 based on the results, the system still can be of value. “the justices’ action came so close to the upcoming election that the records can only legally be used on a case-by-case basis — and not for the type of bulk voter-roll matching that some states want to conduct.” {Politico link}

(more…)

Secretary of State Marco Rubio gave an extensive press conference following a meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov at the conclusion of U.S. participation in the 2026 UNGA.  The full video and transcript are below.

There’s little argument that Secretary Rubio is one of the most remarkable Secretary of States’ in our modern history.

[Transcript] – SECRETARY RUBIO:  Okay, go ahead.

QUESTION:  Mr. Secretary, what were the U.S. demands with the Iranians yesterday, and was there any discussion of return to the MOU, or have the terms changed for the United States in terms —

SECRETARY RUBIO: Well, yesterday’s conversation was with some of the mediators involved in that process, and I don’t want to characterize it as one direction or another.  I think it’s a pretty clear understanding of what this – remember everything here, at its core, the number one issue – the President highlighted this yesterday in his speech before the world – Iran can never have a nuclear weapon.  Everything emanates from that.

We understand the straits is an issue.  The southern lane of the straits is open.  Every day more and more barrels of oil are flowing through there.  And they’re open, thanks to the efforts of the United States military that’s both defending shipping and has removed mines.  And that trend will continue.  Meanwhile, the only blockade in the Hormuz Straits is the one we’ve imposed on Iran because they keep firing on ships and they continue to do so as early as this morning.  There was another launch, so – on shipping.  So, we’ll continue to defend.  We’ll continue to hold the straits open.  So that’s an issue.

But the core issue here is that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon.  We make that point in every interaction with them.  Beyond that, I would say that – I don’t want to characterize these meetings because these – if there’s going to be a deal with Iran, it’s not going to happen at a press conference.  It’s going to involve a lot of hard work over a period of time, and it will engage and involve mediators as well.

So as the President said, he’s open to a deal.  The President’s open, still to this moment, to making a deal with Iran that allows Iran to be what it should be, which is a great and prosperous country.  But if they continue to insist on the desire for a nuclear weapon, their support for proxies in the region that – their support of terrorism – they’re the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism – then we’re going to have big problems with them.  And the President has a number of options available to him, including the ones he’s already taken, which is to impose severe and growing economic costs.  But he also has some military options, upon which I won’t speculate.

(more…)

Politico (EU) puts the spin on the actual ask by saying, “NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe U.S. Gen. Alexus Grynkewich wants more information on escalating hybrid threats.” However, if you pull back the NATO wording and current position, what it really looks like is U.S NATO leaders telling Europe to prove all of these “hybrid attacks” they keep speaking about.

NATO is a collective of EU nations.  The official position of NATO is “it sees no imminent threat of a Russian attack.” However, several of the EU-NATO countries are independently reporting “hybrid attacks” under opaque descriptions and then using political soundbites to designate Russia as the cause.

Just like the “drone attack on Zelenskyy’s airplane,” most of these ‘reports’ end up being debunked once they are investigated, or scrutinized.  There have been dozens of so-called ‘hybrid attacks’ that were debunked or claimed in such an ambigous fashion they cannot be proven as accurate.

Ex. Russia flying a helicopter in Kaliningrad, is not a hybrid attack against Poland.  A Russian drone crashing 160km away from Chișinău, is not a hybrid attack against Moldova.  A can of tuna fish attached to a short-range quadcopter at the Leipzig/Halle Airport is not a hybrid attack against Germany.

None of the heads of the nations described above (Poland, Moldova, Germany) have ever asserted those “hybrid attack” examples as an official position of the government.  It’s always some arms-length politician or internal bureaucrat that makes the claim, then the media amplifies it.

Well, it would appear that NATO Commander Grynkewich is trying to figure out how/why these quasi-official “hybrid attack” claims are getting promoted by media; because ultimately, it’s his responsibility to formulate a response.  One can only imagine Secretary Hegseth calling General Grynkewich on behalf of President Trump and asking for some clarity amid the European claims/noise.

(more…)

It should be transparently obvious by now. Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has shifted his tin cup strategy from directly asking for money, to presenting himself as the world’s leading arms manufacturer.  In essence, Zelenskyy has drone pencils in his tin cup.

Keep watching and we will all start to see this grifting business model in play.

Earlier today Zelenskyy said, “President Trump and I had a meeting where we discussed general matters. After that, our negotiating teams held a separate, long meeting. The agreement is as follows: we will brief the European side and discuss these details with them; the Americans will speak with the Russians; and in ten days, we will come back with views and results in some shape or form.

As for a trilateral Ukraine-U.S.-Russia meeting, the American side proposed preparing it and meeting at the technical level. We are waiting for the United States to propose a date. The United States proposed the United Arab Emirates as the venue for such a meeting.

There are concrete agreements regarding Patriot licenses. At our meeting, President Trump stressed that he had made his final decision: Ukraine will receive licenses to produce Patriot missiles. (read more)

Now put the lead-in paragraphs as an overlay against that statement.  Zelenskyy wants to organize his corrupt financial system, specifically the income aspect, around Ukraine as the world’s leading arms dealer.

Obviously, this business model provides numerous benefits for everyone inside the Ukraine govt operation whose lifestyle and affluence are dependent on the inflow of massive amounts of money.

If Zelenskyy can get the Patriot Missile licenses, then he can expand his business operation to build and sell Patriots’ to Germany (have been begging for them) and beyond.  Zelenskyy becomes the EU hub for EU-NATO arms manufacturing and production.  He’s not stupid.  If the USA pulls back from EU-NATO, Zelenskyy steps in to fill the void.  That appears to be his overall plan.

(more…)

U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer appears on CNBC to discuss the trade aspect of the U.S-China negotiations against the backdrop of the official state visit by Chinese Chairman Xi Jinping.

USTR Greer notes the tariffs against China remain in place and extended for several months as the U.S. reviews Beijing compliance with pre-existing agreements.  This builds on what Greer previously said about ultimately the U.S. and China are in a managed situation, where the U.S. doesn’t put any focus on what China says, we are looking at what China does.

Stunningly, at 4:25 of the video CNBC pundit Kelly Evans chimes in with a weird talking point about the U.S-China trade deficit not changing. Ambassador Greer quickly corrects Ms Evans, noting her baseline is entirely false. The trade disparity between the U.S and China has reduced by 40% over the past year, in part because the U.S. is leveraging tariffs as enforcement mechanisms to previous purchase agreements.  WATCH:

In typical leftist fashion, Ms Kelly Evans says “if true” to the United States Trade Representative.  Who else, other than the USTR, would know the specifics of accuracy for the data Ms Evans is mis-citing.  Quite silly.

(more…)

After writing the lengthy outline about the problem faced by Joseph diGenova, a Reagan-era former U.S. attorney and longtime Trump ally who served as counselor to Attorney General Todd Blanche and exited over strategic differences {GO DEEP}, several people provided feedback, generally expressing understanding and agreement.

A few asked for suggestions.

Having looked at the challenges from every direction, and having a deep understanding of the complications within any prosecutorial effort on this highly complex ‘conspiracy’ case, I am going to outline my best advice.

This is how you arrange the case.

In any successful endeavor like this, you need the hook.  You need a central point of focus that brings the entire operation into a clearer view.  Stories like this are not told in a linear fashion; you need a central point of focus and then you build out the storyline from there.

So, what it that inflection?  What is that moment that establishes the point from which everything else falls into place?

First, look at the requirements.  The central event needs to encompass the foundational unlawful activity.  The event needs to be clearly unlawful in nature and highlight the mindset that existed within each of the participants.  The evidence must have a clear, distinct and actionable set of facts that can be directly proven beyond doubt.

The event needs to have been previously investigated, so that time is not wasted repeating a lengthy and exhaustive investigation around the fact pattern.  The event needs a specific set of witnesses, who cannot escape being truthful about the preexisting irrefutable facts. And the event needs to highlight a conspiracy by every participant who cannot deflect their participation by claiming they were unaware of the intent of every action within the process.

Those are the predicate requirements that establish the value of the central point of focus.  This is what makes a grand jury or criminal case jury have a consistent reference point.  If this fact pattern is demonstrably true, then that action or outcome is incontrovertibly self-evident.

(more…)

President Trump and Chairman Xi deliver remarks during the welcome ceremony for the official Chinese delegation state visit. The remarks are in both English and Chinese as interpreted within the ceremony.

Chairman Xi announced two giant pandas, Ping Ping and Fu Shuang, would arrive at Zoo Atlanta within days, continuing a tradition that began when Beijing sent a pair to Washington after Richard Nixon’s 1972 visit.

Cunning Panda Xi also said that as the world’s leading AI powers, both countries had the ‘capability and responsibility to develop and manage AI for good.’ ‘We do not need to avoid mentioning competition, but our competition should be a healthy one and should be kept within bounds. It should be a race of catching up with one another, not a wrestle in which either wins or loses,’ Xi said.  FYI that’s the code-speak of the person chasing from behind.  WATCH:

.

(more…)

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney left the United Nations General Assembly and went directly to the New York Times for a pre-scheduled interview with fellow leftist travelers intent on influencing the U.S midterm election.

Carney having previously appointed Clinton/Obama Democratic operative Maia Johnson as his Chief Operating Officer within his office, obviously had one agenda in mind as he strolled into the Times office for his pre-planned operation.

Within the hour-long conversation, the Canadian Prime Minister had several key points of emphasis in his objective. The top-line hook to draw in the audience was his first statement about having prepared for military combat operations against the United States.  [ARTICLE HERE] Key points below:

(1) Carney developed contingency plans to use military combat operations against the United States.  Yes, it is transparently obvious this is a political statement.  His mentioning of this is meant to create the traditional leftist victimhood position used in all psychological operations.  Carney follows this outlandish statement by saying these military plans are no longer needed because he now feels he has “a good relationship” with President Trump.

[…] “Prime Minister Mark Carney of Canada said that he had prepared over the past year for the “extreme tail risk” that President Trump might order military action against Canada but disclosed that the two men have spoken “frequently,” even since trade talks collapsed last month, describing a tense, evolving relationship.

Mr. Carney suggested that he had carefully examined the possibility of U.S.-led military action, but declined to discuss in detail what that involved. “I think you have a responsibility in these roles to look at extreme tail risk,” said Mr. Carney, a former central banker for Britain and Canada. … “That’s just risk management. That’s not a base case, but it would be irresponsible not to” prepare.”

(2) Carney outlines how he intends to build a closer economic relationship with China as a hedge against Canadian dependency on the United States.  Given the statements made by Carney in Beijing, this does not come as a surprise; however, it is the expressed open intent to further attach Canada to China that should raise eyebrows.

(more…)

President Trump has drawn attention to this segment by Victor Davis Hanson outlining the status of the Canadian position thanks to Prime Minister Mark Carney.  Why? Because VDH is the type of American that Canadians actually listen to.

VDH apparently talks in the tones and constructs that appeal to Canadians, therefore his remarks on how Mark Carney is manipulating Canada hit more directly than when other pundits do it.  VDH has seen a remarkable uptick in the size of his audience ever since he started talking about Canada, because his new audience is almost exclusively Canadian.

Hanson speaks about the Canadian dynamic below.  It’s monotone, but the “elbows crew’ like it.  WATCH (prompted):

.

Prime Minister Carney asks why Victor Davis Hanson is doing this to him.

I’m not a big fan of Canadians switching positions and suddenly wanting to accept trade terms.  CTH would prefer that we sever all ties with Canada, terminate the USMCA and watch them slowly spiral for a year or two.  Carney Inc deserves it.

(more…)

Promethean Action PAC’s Barbara Boyd gives her recap of President Trump’s visit to the United Nation’s General Assembly in New York.

“Boyd argues President Trump used his UN General Assembly speech to indict globalization and mass migration, contrasting his “nation state” vision with Brazil’s Lula da Silva and warning Brazil’s Oct. 4 election could shift Latin America’s direction. It highlights Trump’s focus on security in the Western Hemisphere through the Shield of America alliance targeting narco-terror groups and says media coverage instead fixates on desk bans for CNN, MSNBC and Politico.

The episode claims Trump is pursuing peace in Ukraine and Iran while “globalists” push escalation, citing European voices advocating Russia’s breakup and calls for war. It describes a three-hour US-Iran meeting after Trump threatened annihilation unless Iran negotiates, plus tightened sanctions and a blockade. Finally, it says Trump rejected AI “superintelligence” panic, predicting major productivity gains and a new industrial renaissance.”

.

(more…)