Uncensored Free Speech Platform

GOP leaders seek extension to block House votes on repealing Trump tariffs
Same show, different day.

House Republican leaders are trying to extend a prohibition on votes in the House that would overturn tariffs from President Donald Trump.

The rules committee advanced legislation on Monday night that would block votes to overturn the tariffs on countries such as Canada, China, and Mexico, among others, through July 31. The previous ban, which expired at the end of January, had prevented several Democratic-led resolutions that sought to repeal tariffs for months.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) told reporters on Monday night he was confident he had the votes to pass a procedural measure that includes the tariff-blocking language. But the speaker’s razor-thin, one-seat majority could make it difficult to pass the tariff ban, along with other bills.

Eyes will be on such GOP members as Reps. Don Bacon (R-NE) or Mike Turner (R-OH) to see whether they will break ranks and oppose the procedural vote on Tuesday, which will ban votes on tariff repeals and advance the Law-Enforcement Innovate to De-Escalate Act, the Undersea Cable Protection Act of 2025, and the Securing America’s Critical Minerals Supply Act.

Both lawmakers, among other Republicans, have expressed skepticism in the past. Bacon recently told the Washington Examiner that he advocated Johnson not block tariff votes through a “rule” vote. The Nebraska congressman said the president’s recent rhetoric about acquiring Greenland by placing tariffs on European allies.

LEADER JEFFRIES COULD BE ‘SPEAKER JEFFRIES’ SOON. WHAT CHALLENGES COULD HE FACE?

“I don’t think the rule will pass again,” Bacon said.

Bacon was among those who negotiated with the speaker to secure a short-term block on tariff-repeal resolutions back in September 2025, telling the Washington Examiner he was reluctant to help leadership again.

Turning Point Action endorses Ken Paxton in Texas Senate race
This deserves loud pushback.

Turning Point Action endorsed Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in the Republican Senate primary on Monday.

Charlie Kirk’s Turning Point USA’s funding arm endorsed the conservative firebrand over incumbent Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX). Both the influx of campaign funds and the prestige of backing from the assassinated Kirk’s creation are sure to give Paxton an extra boost in the contentious primary.

“I’m honored to be endorsed by Turning Point Action,” Paxton said in a post on X. “The movement that Charlie Kirk built has inspired millions, and I’m proud to be standing alongside Turning Point Action in carrying on the fight to save this country and defend our freedoms.”

Turning Point Action hailed Paxton as a “conservative warrior,” saying its endorsement would lend further momentum to the campaign.

Cornyn was quick to respond, reposting remarks from Jonah Wendt, communication director for former Vice President Mike Pence’s Advancing American Freedom, implicitly accusing TPUSA of straying from its founder’s vision with the endorsement.

“Charlie Kirk: ‘Get married. Have children. Build a legacy.’ Ken Paxton: ‘Cheat on your wife. Get divorced. Run for higher office,'” he wrote, referencing Paxton’s alleged cheating scandal and divorce.

Charlie Kirk: “Get married. Have children. Build a legacy.”

Ken Paxton: “Cheat on your wife. Get divorced. Run for higher office.”
— Jonah Wendt (@jonah_wendt) February 9, 2026

Cornyn then shared his endorsement from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

“Senator John Cornyn consistently supports policies that provide stability for businesses, promote responsible budgeting, and strengthen America,” Neil Bradley, executive vice president and chief policy officer at the Chamber of Commerce, said in the endorsement. “From pro-growth fiscal and tax policy to proposals that strengthen our national security, Senator Cornyn has demonstrated steady, results-driven leadership. This is the kind of leadership the nation and Texas can always count on.”

PAXTON ISSUES LEGAL OPINION TO DECLARE DEI ‘FRAMEWORKS’ IN TEXAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL

Cornyn said he was “honored” to receive the endorsement.

Whoever wins the Republican primary next month will go against either Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) or Democratic state Rep. James Talarico in the November midterm elections.

Kid Rock rips Bad Bunny’s Super Bowl halftime show as ‘middle finger’ to conservatives
This framing isn't accidental.

Rock singer Kid Rock voiced his displeasure with the choice of Bad Bunny as the performer for the Super Bowl 60 halftime show, viewing it as a “middle finger” to conservatives.

Rock led a rival halftime show, backed by Turning Point USA, following conservative backlash over the choice of Bad Bunny. In an appearance on Fox News, the Trump-supporting singer bashed the choice of Bunny, saying the performance was an insult to the MAGA movement.

After going over the most recent performances, painting it as a steady decline into politicization, he said the choice of the Puerto Rican star was a bridge too far.

“To me, it was kind of just like, another middle finger to conservatives, to the MAGA crowd, to my base, to everything,” he said.

Later in the interview, however, Rock was more charitable toward Bunny when asked about the performance’s content, though he added that he “didn’t understand any of it.”

“I mean, I saw there’s a lot of dancers and a lot of big to-do stuff,” Rock said. “And you know, he said he wanted to have a dance party. Looked like he had one, you know, not my cup of tea. But I don’t fault that kid for doing the Super Bowl, getting in front of a global audience. I fault the … NFL for putting them in that position. Poor kid.”

Rock previously performed in the 2004 Super Bowl alongside Justin Timberlake and Janet Jackson.

“Nobody remembers I played the Super Bowl because that was when Janet Jackson showed her boob,” he joked. “Nobody remembers I was on that thing.”

TPUSA’s “All-American Halftime Show” featured performances from Rock, Brantley Gilbert, Gabby Barrett, and Brice Lee. Both shows aired approximately around the same time.

TURNING POINT USA CELEBRATES ‘OVER 20 MILLION’ VIEWERS FOR ITS ‘ALL-AMERICAN HALFTIME SHOW’

There are conflicting accounts of the total number of viewers, given that it was broadcast across several different platforms, but Andrew Kolvet, the executive producer of TPUSA’s The Charlie Kirk Show, said the total may have exceeded 20 million viewers.

Though an impressive viewership, it was dwarfed by Bunny’s over 135 million viewers, the most-watched Super Bowl halftime show of all time.

Steve Adams: Championing decent Conservative values in Camden
Confidence requires clarity.

Cllr Steve Adams is the Leader of the Conservative Group on Camden Council.

The greatest challenge for a minority party within a hugely one-sided council will always be that, while opposition to unpopular policy and decisions is easy to garner, what is much harder is to convert that opposition into effective political change.

For the last two years in Camden, the Conservative Group has concentrated solely on local issues, their mismanagement by the Labour-led council administration with the collusion of the official opposition by the Lib Dems. The two parties spend more time at council meetings in posturing on national matters than on pressing local problems.

We have made sure that we have not entertained their game of political ping pong.

Camden has a particularly politically aware population and is literally on the edge of the Westminster bubble. With the Prime Minister as a local MP and much of the Labour hierarchy resident nearby, the most effective and credible course has been for us to aim at reclaiming the high ground of competence.

After each Full Council meeting, we have published a report on our position, which goes out to almost 7,000 members and others. The intention of this initiative is to make use of the work we put into the preparation for meetings and prevent that disappearing like yesterday’s papers into the budgie cage. This continued communication with our supporters is popular and respectful of their belief in us. We are also confident that at the ballot box this will reap benefits.

Another Camden challenge is the burning question

“How can the democratic voice of opposition wards within a larger Council be delivered?”  

When the few primarily Conservative wards clamour against the imposed diktat of the council and 85 per cent local opposition to LTNs is voiced, how can their opinions be considered fairly? This is not a PR quiz, but rather a fundamental question on the essence of representation.

The Cabinet system of local government has delivered Camden a hugely whipped council where even gentle questioning by majority members is effectively stymied. It is not popular with voters and provides us with an opening upon which to benefit. We are making this flaw in local democracy known to the electorate and will increase this message as May 7th draws near.

Kemi Badenoch has accepted many times that in the years leading up to the last election, our party lost the trust of the electorate including our own supporters, and she has committed to rebuilding that vital missing link between the country and the Conservatives. This shows her distinct move away from the bluster and fumble that preceded her.

I have always considered local politics to be just that; local and issue based. However, I appreciate that they reflect on …

Tomas Roberto: Why Jimmy Lai’s sentence demands more than Government handwringing
What's the endgame here?

Tomas Roberto is UK Head of Public Affairs and Advocacy at The Committee for Freedom in Hong Kong Foundation

Jimmy Lai’s 20-year prison sentence is not just a bogus legal judgment; it is a geopolitical message. Lai, the 78-year-old founder of the now-shuttered Apple Daily and a British citizen, has been punished to demonstrate that Beijing can jail a Briton, dismantle Hong Kong’s freedoms, and suffer no meaningful consequences. That message did not emerge in a vacuum. It was reinforced, if not invited, by our own government’s weakness, most notably the Prime Minister’s supine visit to Beijing, which signalled accommodation when confrontation was required.

Lai’s “crime” was insisting that Hong Kong’s people deserved the rights promised to them under the Sino-British Joint Declaration – rights now systematically dismantled. His sentence is not merely intended to silence him; it is designed to terrorise others into submission.

The government has condemned the verdict, as it should. But condemnation has become a substitute for action. Statements of “deep concern” and diplomatic protests ring hollow when they carry no consequences. If British citizenship is to mean anything, it must extend beyond rhetorical sympathy or raising cases “respectfully” in private. The Foreign Secretary has said she will now “rapidly engage further” on Lai’s case. The obvious question is: why was the government not already doing so?

Beijing did not hand down this sentence despite British diplomacy; it did so because of it.

The Prime Minister’s visit to Beijing, framed as “re-engagement” and “stability,” was read exactly as intended. Britain wants smooth relations more than accountability. Human rights were raised politely, behind closed doors, while trade, investment, and “dialogue” dominated the optics. Jimmy Lai’s name, if mentioned at all, was clearly not treated as a red line.

Authoritarian regimes are adept at interpreting weakness. Beijing saw a Britain eager to normalise relations, anxious to appear pragmatic, and unwilling to risk economic discomfort. The result was predictable. With diplomatic costs lowered, the Chinese state proceeded with maximum punishment. Lai’s sentence is, in part, the bill for Britain’s deference.

If Britain wishes to reverse course and retain any credibility, it must now act with force. Indeed, engagement must become conditional, not automatic.

First, the U.K. should impose immediate and sweeping Magnitsky sanctions on all officials involved in Lai’s prosecution, including judges, prosecutors, and senior Hong Kong and mainland officials. London’s financial system remains one of Britain’s most powerful tools; those who dismantle freedom should be barred from enjoying its protections.

Second, economic consequences must follow. Britain …

Peter Franklin: Does it matter if the Conservative Party becomes the Kemi Show?
We're watching the same failure loop.

Peter Franklin is an Associate Editor of UnHerd.

No one has benefitted more from the release of the Epstein Files than Kemi Badenoch.

Before the Mandelson scandal blew-up again, the political narrative was heading in the wrong direction for her. It wasn’t just the disruptive effect of the defections; it was also the botched response. Those uncalled for remarks about Suella Braverman’s mental health were quickly withdrawn and explained away as an isolated lapse of judgement. However, the mocking tone of Badenoch’s “drama queens” speech on the 28th of January spoke to a deeper problem: the apparent belief that we can convince the country we are the “party of serious people” by means of an unserious speech.

The Gorton and Denton by-election presented Badenoch with another impediment. Our vote in the constituency is already low and likely to be squeezed by Reform. So, again, a further drain on the momentum that she’d accumulated last year.

There’s more bad news to come with the May elections for the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Senedd and various councils. These are seats last contested four or five years ago and the results will reflect everything that Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak did to crash the Conservative Party when they were in charge. Unfortunately for Badenoch, she’ll be the one sweeping up the wreckage.

It’ll probably be worse for Labour.

If Starmer hasn’t already gone by that point, then coming third in Scotland and losing in Wales for the first time in a hundred years could be the last straw. And yet the choice of a new Labour leader — and, possibly, an acting prime minister, will extend the period in which the Conservative Party struggles for traction.

Or rather that would have been the case if the Epstein files hadn’t recontextualised the entire narrative.

Far from being sidelined, Badenoch has been handed a starring role. And last week, she played it perfectly.

Rather than using PMQs to grandstand, she got the Prime Minister to make a crucial matter-of-fact admission in front of his stony-faced colleagues. And instead of pushing for a vote of no confidence, which would have united the Labour Party, the use of the humble address procedure gave the whole House the space to extract maximum concessions from the government.

So if Keir Starmer does end up following Morgan McSweeney out the door, it won’t be the winning party in Gorton and Denton that gets the credit, nor the forthcoming triumphs for the SNP in Scotland and Plaid Cymru in Wales, nor Starmer’s enemies within the Labour Party. Rather, the clip that’s going to be played over-and-over again is Badenoch’s stiletto of a question: “Can the Prime Minister tell us: did the official security vetting that he received mention Mandelson’s ongoing relationship with the …

What the Tories see when they look at Starmer
We're watching the same failure loop.

“We don’t do betting in the Tory Party anymore,” quipped one shadow cabinet minister to me yesterday when asked about the odds of Sir Keir Starmer resigning as Prime Minister – an aside to bad memories of the gambling scandal at the last election.

Others were less restrained. One member of LOTO told me plainly: “He’s a dead man walking. He will be there for PMQs this week – but he may not be there for the next one.”

But there is a line for Kemi Badenoch to follow as Starmer’s leadership seems to unravel. “Kemi has to balance doing the constitutional role as Leader of the Opposition with not seeming to enjoy the Prime Minister’s discomfort too much,” they added, “it is delicate”.

But as one CCHQ source told me: “It is quite nice seeing it from the other side for a change.”

Some in the shadow cabinet had thought the Prime Minister might depart alongside his chief of staff Morgan McSweeney. Politically amputated, with the vultures circling, Starmer might have been tempted to recognise where he had lost and call it quits.

Not quite yet. I would say he is fighting on, but that feels overly generous. From McSweeney’s resignation at 2pm on Sunday, Starmer went more than 24 hours without a single cabinet colleague offering public support. Even at the height of Boris Johnson’s collapse, half the Cabinet could still be relied upon to appear on air in his defence.

With cabinet silence still lingering throughout the morning, Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar made his move with a public defenestration of Starmer, calling for his resignation. But it left him conspicuously alone. He jumped, but no one followed.

As yesterday wore on, the leadership contest that had seemed genuinely plausible at the start of the day began to fizzle. It had the feel of a Burnham moment: the senior figure safely outside Westminster making a bid for personal advantage – in Sarwar’s case, some distance from the poor Scottish Labour results expected in May – only to trigger a reflexive show of loyalty to the wounded leader from those at the centre of government.

“Honestly, how has Sarwar ended the day in a worse position than Starmer?” one Tory MP asked.

Eventually, David Lammy became the first cabinet member to break cover, tweeting: “Keir Starmer won a massive mandate 18 months ago, for five years to deliver on Labour’s manifesto that we all stood on. We should let nothing distract us from our mission to change Britain and we support the Prime Minister in doing that.”

A slow trickle followed. One by one, cabinet ministers – alongside the likes of Angela Rayner – posted strikingly similar messages on X about Starmer’s “huge mandate” and their “fullest support”. They had apparently been instructed to tweet them, if the curiously identical phrasing and forced language wasn’t …

‘Thank goodness you’re stopping him’ Trump allegedly told Palm Beach police about Epstein
Every delay has consequences.

A 2019 FBI report revealed that President Donald Trump allegedly called a Palm Beach, Florida, police chief to express gratitude to a Palm Beach, Florida, police chief in 2006 for “stopping” Jeffrey Epstein, after the disgraced financier and convicted sex offender’s crimes became public. Trump made the comments in 2006, long before his foray into politics and presidential run. He allegedly told the police chief that everyone knew Epstein “has been doing this.”

“Mar-A-Lago is a mixture of everyone,” read the report. “Donald Trump told [redacted] that he threw Epstein out of his club. Trump called the PBPD and told him ‘thank goodness you’re stopping him, everyone has known he’s been doing this.”

The report was based on a phone conversation Trump allegedly had in October 2019 with a Palm Beach police chief at the time, whose name was redacted, the Miami Herald reported. The report was filed in April 2020, and the chief’s name was revealed to be Michael Reiter years later.

Trump also spoke about Epstein’s reputation in New York City, New York, and his former girlfriend and trafficking accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell. He called her Epstein’s “operative.”

“Trump told him people in New York knew Epstein was disgusting,” read the FBI report. “Trump said Maxwell was Epstein’s operative.”

“She is evil, focus on her,” Trump allegedly told Reiter.  

“Trump told [redacted] that he was around Epstein once when teenagers were present and Trump ‘got the hell out of there,’” read the report. “Trump was one of the first people to call when people found out that they were investigating Epstein.”

The report also discussed Prince Andrew’s presence at Palm Beach, stating that “he was a fixture in Palm Beach and he had no protection while there.”

Trump’s alleged statements in the report would appear to contradict his earlier claims from July 2019, when he denied knowing anything about Epstein’s sex crimes against underage girls.

GHISLAINE MAXWELL PLEADS FIFTH AND DEMANDS CLEMENCY IN JEFFREY EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION

“No, I had no idea,” Trump said at the time. “I had no idea.”

Trump’s alleged 2006 phone call, along with the 2019 report, had previously gone unreported.

An FBI employee claimed that Trump had not called Reiter in 2006, according to the Miami Herald.

“We are not aware of any corroborating evidence that the President contacted law enforcement 20 years ago,” said the FBI.

Newslinks for Tuesday the 10th February 2026
Who's accountable for the results?

Starmer fends off coup his aides accuse Streeting of being behind, as Badenoch insists his position is still untenable

“Sir Keir Starmer on Monday insisted he was “not prepared to walk away” after he survived the most serious challenge yet to his leadership, even as fresh tensions emerged between the embattled UK prime minister and one of his leading rivals. Starmer’s authority was badly damaged after Anas Sarwar, Labour’s leader in Scotland, called on him to resign less than two years after winning power, saying there had been “too many mistakes”. The prime minister’s allies claimed that Sarwar’s move was co-ordinated with health secretary Wes Streeting, who is seen as a contender for the Labour leadership if and when Starmer leaves office. “You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to wonder whether Wes knew about and encouraged him to make a move,” said one MP close to Starmer. Streeting’s team hit back, criticising Starmer’s Downing Street operation for trying to implicate the health secretary even after he had voiced some support for the prime minister. “We did not ask Anas to do this, he did not co-ordinate with Anas on this, Anas is the leader of the Scottish Labour Party, he is his own man, and Wes has the highest respect for him,” said a spokesperson for Streeting.” – FT

‘Too many mistakes’ Scottish Labour leader tells Starmer to quit now and blasts ‘it’s not good enough’ – as PM desperately clings on to career – The Sun

Cabinet bounced into giving PM ‘a stay of execution’: Ministers back Starmer after 24 hours of silence as markets wobble in wake of Scottish Labour chief telling Sir Keir ‘go now’… amid war with Wes – Daily Mail

Starmer still standing after the coup that never was – The Times

Cabinet forced to back Starmer to save his skin – Daily Telegraph

‘This is my fight’ Starmer vows to fight on & beat rebels in Labour showdown as he pleads with MPs to battle Reform after Mandelson scandal – The Sun

Keir Starmer tells MPs: I’ve won every fight I’ve been in — as it happened – The Times

Keir Starmer says he is ‘not prepared to walk away’ after call for resignation – Guardian

Starmer stumbles on as rivals balk at killer blow – FT

Editorial

While Sir Keir clings on to his leadership, next to nothing is being done to fix UK’s broken borders or flailing economy – The Sun

Comment

Starmer should go for the good of the country – Kemi Badenoch, Daily Telegraph

Blimey, what a Monday! But the nasal knight will live to honk another day – Quentin Letts, Daily Mail

Neither good nor serious – Ben Sixsmith, The Critic

Labour’s toxic cult of masculinity has been Starmer’s undoing – Suzanne Moore, Daily Telegraph

McSweeney’s exit sounds Starmer’s death knell – William Atkinson, CapX

Today

What the Tories see when they look at Starmer …

Major housing bill clears House as Senate and Trump grapple with affordability woes
This is performative politics again.

The House passed a bipartisan housing bill that would enact new policies to boost housing supply and ease the affordability crisis plaguing the nation.

The highly anticipated housing legislation, the Housing for the 21st Century Act, passed the House in an overwhelming 390-9 vote on Monday. The bill would ease some federal housing regulations to boost supply and would also nudge state and local governments to loosen land-use rules that make it difficult to build housing.

The legislative package could prove to be one of the most significant economic measures passed this Congress. However, it faces a complicated path in the Senate. Furthermore, President Donald Trump has recently appeared skeptical of efforts to lower housing prices.

WARSHACH TEST: TRUMP’S FED CHAIRMAN PICK KEEPS MONETARY ANALYSTS GUESSING

“This bill represents that consensus of both Democrat and Republican members in the House who want at the federal level to take some steps that we believe will lower the marginal cost of constructing housing, making [Department of Housing and Urban Development] programs more efficient, more effective, more accountable to taxpayers,” House Financial Services Committee chairman Rep. French Hill (R-AR) told a group of reporters on Monday ahead of the vote.

Housing costs have been a major component of the affordability problems facing consumers. Home prices and mortgage rates have soared over the past several years, pushing home ownership out of reach for many Americans. The median age of a first-time homebuyer has risen to 40, according to one account.

Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-IN), another member of the committee, told the Washington Examiner that the bill is “our best hope of getting housing legislation passed this Congress for Americans in need of a home” and called on the Senate to take up the legislation.

But the Monday passage tees up questions about next steps and whether the Senate will take up the House legislation after previously passing its version, the Road to Housing Act. Or perhaps whether there will be a conference about the various provisions that differ in the two pieces of legislation, and a final bill crafted between the two chambers.

The Housing for the 21st Century Act is designed to modernize local development and rural housing programs, further expand financing opportunities for manufactured and affordable housing, and protect borrowers and assisted families. It also enhances oversight of housing providers.

One significant …