Uncensored Free Speech Platform




  • Grieving families of DC midair collision say more needs to be done to fix safety concerns one year after tragedy
    This deserves loud pushback.

    Families of the 67 people killed in a midair collision over the Potomac River say regulators have taken steps to improve aviation safety since the crash one year ago, though they argue additional changes are still needed.

    On Jan. 29, 2025, American Airlines Flight 5342 was circling to land at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport when it collided with a U.S. Army Black Hawk helicopter, sending both aircraft into the icy Potomac River. All 60 passengers and four crew members aboard the jet were killed, along with three soldiers in the helicopter, marking the deadliest U.S. aviation disaster in nearly 25 years. 

    As the National Transportation Safety Board prepares to vote on the crash’s probable cause and safety recommendations, families say the anniversary is both a moment of remembrance and a test of momentum, whether the warnings exposed by the collision will finally force lasting reform or quietly fade.

    The flight that changed everything

    For Sheri and Tim Lilley, the year is anchored to a memory that feels painfully ordinary. The last time Sheri saw her stepson, Sam Lilley, he was sitting in his car outside their Savannah home, taking longer than expected to pull away. Sam, 28, was the first officer flying the CRJ-700 that day for PSA Airways, a regional carrier for American Airlines. He was choosing a playlist, entering directions into the GPS, and double-checking details before heading to the airport. Sheri waited in the driveway longer than planned, then finally turned inside. “He was basically preflighting the car,” she said.

    In the weeks after the DCA crash, grief gave way to resolve. Tim Lilley, a pilot with decades of experience flying both military helicopters and commercial aircraft in the Washington region, found himself pulled into investigative hearings, policy briefings, and long conversations with regulators and lawmakers. What began as an effort to understand what happened to his son became, in his words, a second job and a moral mandate. “If something like this were to happen again,” Tim said, “and we had stayed silent, we couldn’t face those families.”

    Sam Lilley, 28, a co-pilot killed in a midair collision over the Potomac River near Washington, D.C. (Courtesy of Timothy Lilley.)

    The questions Tim started asking after his son’s death were the same ones he had spent decades asking as a pilot.

    For years, helicopter routes and commercial flight paths around Washington overlapped, relying heavily on visual separation, …
    Grieving families of DC midair collision say more needs to be done to fix safety concerns one year after tragedy This deserves loud pushback. Families of the 67 people killed in a midair collision over the Potomac River say regulators have taken steps to improve aviation safety since the crash one year ago, though they argue additional changes are still needed. On Jan. 29, 2025, American Airlines Flight 5342 was circling to land at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport when it collided with a U.S. Army Black Hawk helicopter, sending both aircraft into the icy Potomac River. All 60 passengers and four crew members aboard the jet were killed, along with three soldiers in the helicopter, marking the deadliest U.S. aviation disaster in nearly 25 years.  As the National Transportation Safety Board prepares to vote on the crash’s probable cause and safety recommendations, families say the anniversary is both a moment of remembrance and a test of momentum, whether the warnings exposed by the collision will finally force lasting reform or quietly fade. The flight that changed everything For Sheri and Tim Lilley, the year is anchored to a memory that feels painfully ordinary. The last time Sheri saw her stepson, Sam Lilley, he was sitting in his car outside their Savannah home, taking longer than expected to pull away. Sam, 28, was the first officer flying the CRJ-700 that day for PSA Airways, a regional carrier for American Airlines. He was choosing a playlist, entering directions into the GPS, and double-checking details before heading to the airport. Sheri waited in the driveway longer than planned, then finally turned inside. “He was basically preflighting the car,” she said. In the weeks after the DCA crash, grief gave way to resolve. Tim Lilley, a pilot with decades of experience flying both military helicopters and commercial aircraft in the Washington region, found himself pulled into investigative hearings, policy briefings, and long conversations with regulators and lawmakers. What began as an effort to understand what happened to his son became, in his words, a second job and a moral mandate. “If something like this were to happen again,” Tim said, “and we had stayed silent, we couldn’t face those families.” Sam Lilley, 28, a co-pilot killed in a midair collision over the Potomac River near Washington, D.C. (Courtesy of Timothy Lilley.) The questions Tim started asking after his son’s death were the same ones he had spent decades asking as a pilot. For years, helicopter routes and commercial flight paths around Washington overlapped, relying heavily on visual separation, …
    0 Comments 0 Shares 217 Views 0 Reviews
  • David Gauke: The Conservatives can afford to live longer if they ‘Prosper’
    This affects the entire country.

    David Gauke is a former Conservative Justice Secretary and was an independent candidate in South-West Hertfordshire at the 2019 general election. He is a vice-chair of Prosper UK.

    Prosper UK launched today. Chaired by Andy Street and Ruth Davidson, in essence it makes three arguments.

    The first is that a strong economy should be the nation’s priority. It is only through a strong economy that we can improve living standards, increase the opportunities for future generations, fund our public services, and enable us to adequately defend ourselves.

    Second, the centre-right is best placed to deliver that strong economy. We need a thriving private sector; hard work and innovation should be rewarded; our tax and regulatory environment should make us internationally competitive; we should pursue free trade not protectionism; our public finances should be sustainable; markets matter; strong, independent institutions provide the stability and certainty that businesses need to invest; and Governments have to think about the long term.  These are all attributes of the centre right at its best.

    Third, the centre right, focused on the economy, is the political space the Conservatives should occupy.  If it does, the party will prosper electorally.

    I have written enough columns for ConservativeHome to know that this latter claim will be challenged.

    It will be argued that the centre ground no longer exists.  The country can be divided into a left block (who will never voter Conservative) and a right block and, therefore, what is needed are policies aimed solely on that right block, designed to squeeze out Reform.

    But that is not what the polling, commissioned by Prosper UK and undertaken by More in Common, found.  They asked people to place themselves on the political spectrum.  The polling reveals that 22 million consider themselves to be in the centre or the centre right.  Nearly a third of those people – 7 million – consider that no political party adequately represents their views. To put that in context, at the last General Election, the Conservatives received fewer than 7 million votes.

    Some will argue that the future of right-of-centre politics should be about defending our national identity and that the biggest single issue facing the country is immigration.

    No one is arguing that it is a matter that should be ignored. Immigration has to be controlled and the levels reached under Boris Johnson’s premiership were unsustainable.  But it is also true that some of the language about immigration and immigrants used by some right-wing politicians is deeply divisive.  It might be popular with some voters, but it puts off others.  As net migration falls, and the repercussions will be complex and not entirely positive, this would be the wrong issue upon …
    David Gauke: The Conservatives can afford to live longer if they ‘Prosper’ This affects the entire country. David Gauke is a former Conservative Justice Secretary and was an independent candidate in South-West Hertfordshire at the 2019 general election. He is a vice-chair of Prosper UK. Prosper UK launched today. Chaired by Andy Street and Ruth Davidson, in essence it makes three arguments. The first is that a strong economy should be the nation’s priority. It is only through a strong economy that we can improve living standards, increase the opportunities for future generations, fund our public services, and enable us to adequately defend ourselves. Second, the centre-right is best placed to deliver that strong economy. We need a thriving private sector; hard work and innovation should be rewarded; our tax and regulatory environment should make us internationally competitive; we should pursue free trade not protectionism; our public finances should be sustainable; markets matter; strong, independent institutions provide the stability and certainty that businesses need to invest; and Governments have to think about the long term.  These are all attributes of the centre right at its best. Third, the centre right, focused on the economy, is the political space the Conservatives should occupy.  If it does, the party will prosper electorally. I have written enough columns for ConservativeHome to know that this latter claim will be challenged. It will be argued that the centre ground no longer exists.  The country can be divided into a left block (who will never voter Conservative) and a right block and, therefore, what is needed are policies aimed solely on that right block, designed to squeeze out Reform. But that is not what the polling, commissioned by Prosper UK and undertaken by More in Common, found.  They asked people to place themselves on the political spectrum.  The polling reveals that 22 million consider themselves to be in the centre or the centre right.  Nearly a third of those people – 7 million – consider that no political party adequately represents their views. To put that in context, at the last General Election, the Conservatives received fewer than 7 million votes. Some will argue that the future of right-of-centre politics should be about defending our national identity and that the biggest single issue facing the country is immigration. No one is arguing that it is a matter that should be ignored. Immigration has to be controlled and the levels reached under Boris Johnson’s premiership were unsustainable.  But it is also true that some of the language about immigration and immigrants used by some right-wing politicians is deeply divisive.  It might be popular with some voters, but it puts off others.  As net migration falls, and the repercussions will be complex and not entirely positive, this would be the wrong issue upon …
    0 Comments 0 Shares 188 Views 0 Reviews
  • Trump tries to prove he’s a help in Iowa’s swing House races
    What's the endgame here?

    President Donald Trump is returning to the campaign trail, this time in hopes of buoying a crop of Republicans running for a spate of battleground and GOP-leaning races in Iowa.

    Iowa has open Senate and governor’s races, while another two House seats are considered to be toss-up contests, according to the Cook Political Report.

    With the House, in particular, poised to be decided by a couple of races, every district will be critical as Trump and Republicans try to defy history and retain control of Congress after this November’s midterm elections.

    The White House previewed that Trump’s trip on Tuesday to Clive, Iowa, which is in Rep. Zach Nunn’s (R-IA) 3rd Congressional District, will underscore the president’s economic and energy policies and that he will make similar appearances each week until the end of this electoral cycle.

    “We’re going to be doing a lot of campaign traveling, I hate to tell you guys, but it’s going to keep you employed,” Trump himself told reporters this week. “We’re going to work hard.”

    For Trump, the Iowa trip will be an opportunity to convince farmers struggling due to his trade war with China and other countries that his policies will, at the end of the day, help American agriculture. In December, the administration announced $12 billion in bailout money for the industry, while Trump has also touted the resumption of soybean crop purchases by China — something the country paused in retaliation for his tariffs.

    “The farmers have been great. I helped them out when we were going through the difficulty with China,” the president told reporters. “China’s buying a lot of product right now, as you know. But while we had that negotiation, I gave them, you know, billions of dollars, and they were very happy.”

    The bailout only represents a Band-Aid for farmers, and the industry has other priorities that the president has backed. Nunn, for example, pointed the Washington Examiner to his support of Republicans seeking to approve the year-round sale of higher-ethanol gasoline blends that would increase the demand for corn.

    The push for the higher gasoline blend became a sticking point in government funding talks this past week, but agriculture lawmakers in the House backed off their demand in exchange for a commitment to vote on the policy shift in February.

    “I want him to help, which he has committed to, to getting E-15 across the finish line for America’s farmers,” said Nunn, a second-term congressman seeking reelection in one of …
    Trump tries to prove he’s a help in Iowa’s swing House races What's the endgame here? President Donald Trump is returning to the campaign trail, this time in hopes of buoying a crop of Republicans running for a spate of battleground and GOP-leaning races in Iowa. Iowa has open Senate and governor’s races, while another two House seats are considered to be toss-up contests, according to the Cook Political Report. With the House, in particular, poised to be decided by a couple of races, every district will be critical as Trump and Republicans try to defy history and retain control of Congress after this November’s midterm elections. The White House previewed that Trump’s trip on Tuesday to Clive, Iowa, which is in Rep. Zach Nunn’s (R-IA) 3rd Congressional District, will underscore the president’s economic and energy policies and that he will make similar appearances each week until the end of this electoral cycle. “We’re going to be doing a lot of campaign traveling, I hate to tell you guys, but it’s going to keep you employed,” Trump himself told reporters this week. “We’re going to work hard.” For Trump, the Iowa trip will be an opportunity to convince farmers struggling due to his trade war with China and other countries that his policies will, at the end of the day, help American agriculture. In December, the administration announced $12 billion in bailout money for the industry, while Trump has also touted the resumption of soybean crop purchases by China — something the country paused in retaliation for his tariffs. “The farmers have been great. I helped them out when we were going through the difficulty with China,” the president told reporters. “China’s buying a lot of product right now, as you know. But while we had that negotiation, I gave them, you know, billions of dollars, and they were very happy.” The bailout only represents a Band-Aid for farmers, and the industry has other priorities that the president has backed. Nunn, for example, pointed the Washington Examiner to his support of Republicans seeking to approve the year-round sale of higher-ethanol gasoline blends that would increase the demand for corn. The push for the higher gasoline blend became a sticking point in government funding talks this past week, but agriculture lawmakers in the House backed off their demand in exchange for a commitment to vote on the policy shift in February. “I want him to help, which he has committed to, to getting E-15 across the finish line for America’s farmers,” said Nunn, a second-term congressman seeking reelection in one of …
    0 Comments 0 Shares 183 Views 0 Reviews
  • Third round of January Social Security payments goes out in two days
    Same show, different day.

    The third round of January Social Security payments for retirees, now capped at $5,108, will be issued in two days.

    When will payments arrive?

    Retirees born on or after the 21st of a month will receive this payment on Jan. 28. 

    The first round of payments went out on Jan. 14 to recipients born on or before the 10th of a month, and the second round went out on Jan. 21 to those born between the 11th and 20th of a month.

    When am I eligible?

    Citizens are eligible for Social Security payments beginning at 62 years old.

    How can I maximize my check?

    Social Security payment amounts are determined by several factors, including age of retirement, the amount paid into Social Security, and the number of years paid into Social Security.

    Payments largely depend on a recipient’s retirement age. A beneficiary retiring at the youngest age, 62, could receive up to $2,831 per month, while a 70-year-old retiree could receive up to $5,108 per month, according to the Social Security Administration.

    Beneficiaries can see a personalized estimate of how much they could expect each month through the SSA’s calculator.

    AMERICANS – NOT HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES – NEED RELIEF

    How is it financed?

    Social Security is financed by a payroll tax paid for by employers and employees.

    Social Security payment amounts are set to shrink unless Congress takes action to prevent it. Analysts estimate the SSA will no longer be able to issue full payments as early as 2034, due to a rising number of retirees and a shrinking workforce.
    Third round of January Social Security payments goes out in two days Same show, different day. The third round of January Social Security payments for retirees, now capped at $5,108, will be issued in two days. When will payments arrive? Retirees born on or after the 21st of a month will receive this payment on Jan. 28.  The first round of payments went out on Jan. 14 to recipients born on or before the 10th of a month, and the second round went out on Jan. 21 to those born between the 11th and 20th of a month. When am I eligible? Citizens are eligible for Social Security payments beginning at 62 years old. How can I maximize my check? Social Security payment amounts are determined by several factors, including age of retirement, the amount paid into Social Security, and the number of years paid into Social Security. Payments largely depend on a recipient’s retirement age. A beneficiary retiring at the youngest age, 62, could receive up to $2,831 per month, while a 70-year-old retiree could receive up to $5,108 per month, according to the Social Security Administration. Beneficiaries can see a personalized estimate of how much they could expect each month through the SSA’s calculator. AMERICANS – NOT HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES – NEED RELIEF How is it financed? Social Security is financed by a payroll tax paid for by employers and employees. Social Security payment amounts are set to shrink unless Congress takes action to prevent it. Analysts estimate the SSA will no longer be able to issue full payments as early as 2034, due to a rising number of retirees and a shrinking workforce.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 125 Views 0 Reviews
  • Clinton and Obama criticize federal agents over Pretti shooting
    Every delay has consequences.

    Former Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama released statements on Sunday critical of the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti by a Border Patrol agent.

    Both presidents expressed sympathy over Pretti’s death, and criticized the string of events that led to it. They also lamented the recent events in Minnesota and condemned the conduct and actions of federal agents. Both considered it a pivotal moment for the country’s future.

    “In recent weeks, we’ve watched horrible scenes play out in Minneapolis and other communities that I never thought would take place in America,” Clinton said in his statement. “People, including children, have been seized from their homes, workplaces, and the street by masked federal agents.”

    Over the course of a lifetime, we face only a few moments where the decisions we make and the actions we take will shape our history for years to come.  This is one of them.
    — Bill Clinton (@BillClinton) January 25, 2026

    “Peaceful protesters and citizens exercising their constitutional right to observe and document law enforcement have been arrested, beaten, teargassed, and most searingly, in the cases of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, shot and killed,” Clinton said.

    Obama expressed similar sentiments, calling Pretti’s death a “tragedy” and claimed the nation’s values were “under assault.”

    The killing of Alex Pretti is a heartbreaking tragedy. It should also be a wake-up call to every American, regardless of party, that many of our core values as a nation are increasingly under assault.
    — Barack Obama (@BarackObama) January 25, 2026

    “The killing of Alex Pretti is a heartbreaking tragedy,” said Obama. “It should also be a wake-up call to every American, regardless of party, that many of our core values as a nation are increasingly under assault.”

    He then proceeded to criticize federal law enforcement officials, claiming they engaged in reckless behavior “designed to intimidate and harass” while lacking “discipline and accountability.” He said that Americans were “rightly outraged” over the agents’ behavior amid recent events. 

    “For weeks now, people across the country have been rightly outraged by the spectacle of masked ICE recruits and other federal agents acting with impunity and engaging in tactics that seem designed to intimidate, harass, provoke, and endanger the residents of a major American city,” Obama said. “These unprecedented tactics — which even the former top lawyer of the …
    Clinton and Obama criticize federal agents over Pretti shooting Every delay has consequences. Former Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama released statements on Sunday critical of the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti by a Border Patrol agent. Both presidents expressed sympathy over Pretti’s death, and criticized the string of events that led to it. They also lamented the recent events in Minnesota and condemned the conduct and actions of federal agents. Both considered it a pivotal moment for the country’s future. “In recent weeks, we’ve watched horrible scenes play out in Minneapolis and other communities that I never thought would take place in America,” Clinton said in his statement. “People, including children, have been seized from their homes, workplaces, and the street by masked federal agents.” Over the course of a lifetime, we face only a few moments where the decisions we make and the actions we take will shape our history for years to come.  This is one of them. — Bill Clinton (@BillClinton) January 25, 2026 “Peaceful protesters and citizens exercising their constitutional right to observe and document law enforcement have been arrested, beaten, teargassed, and most searingly, in the cases of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, shot and killed,” Clinton said. Obama expressed similar sentiments, calling Pretti’s death a “tragedy” and claimed the nation’s values were “under assault.” The killing of Alex Pretti is a heartbreaking tragedy. It should also be a wake-up call to every American, regardless of party, that many of our core values as a nation are increasingly under assault. — Barack Obama (@BarackObama) January 25, 2026 “The killing of Alex Pretti is a heartbreaking tragedy,” said Obama. “It should also be a wake-up call to every American, regardless of party, that many of our core values as a nation are increasingly under assault.” He then proceeded to criticize federal law enforcement officials, claiming they engaged in reckless behavior “designed to intimidate and harass” while lacking “discipline and accountability.” He said that Americans were “rightly outraged” over the agents’ behavior amid recent events.  “For weeks now, people across the country have been rightly outraged by the spectacle of masked ICE recruits and other federal agents acting with impunity and engaging in tactics that seem designed to intimidate, harass, provoke, and endanger the residents of a major American city,” Obama said. “These unprecedented tactics — which even the former top lawyer of the …
    0 Comments 0 Shares 159 Views 0 Reviews
  • Private jet with eight aboard crashes on takeoff in Maine, FAA says
    Be honest—this is ridiculous.

    BANGOR, Maine (AP) — A private aircraft carrying eight people crashed on takeoff Sunday night at Maine’s Bangor International Airport, the Federal Aviation Administration said.

    The Bombardier Challenger 600 crashed around 7:45 p.m., and there was no immediate word on the conditions of those aboard. The FAA and the National Transportation Safety Board are investigating.

    The crash occurred as New England and much of the country grappled with a massive winter storm. Bangor had undergone steady snowfall Sunday along with many other parts of the country.

    The airport issued a statement that emergency crews were on the scene at the airport, which was closed after what it described as an incident involving a single aircraft departing the airport.

    Bangor International Airport offers direct flights to cities like Orlando, Florida, Washington, D.C., and Charlotte, North Carolina, and is located about 200 miles (320 kilometers) north of Boston.

    Throughout the weekend, the vast storm dumped sleet, freezing rain and snow across much of the eastern half of the U.S., halting much air and road traffic and knocking out power to hundreds of thousands of homes and businesses in the Southeast.

    Commercial air traffic was also heavily disrupted around much of the U.S.

    Some 12,000 flights were canceled Sunday and nearly 20,000 were delayed, according to the flight tracker  . Airports in Philadelphia, Washington, Baltimore, North Carolina, New York and New Jersey were among those impacted.

    The Bombardier Challenger 600 is a wide-bodied business jet configured for nine to 11 passengers. It was launched in 1980 as the first private jet with a “walk-about cabin” and remains a popular charter option, according to
    Private jet with eight aboard crashes on takeoff in Maine, FAA says Be honest—this is ridiculous. BANGOR, Maine (AP) — A private aircraft carrying eight people crashed on takeoff Sunday night at Maine’s Bangor International Airport, the Federal Aviation Administration said. The Bombardier Challenger 600 crashed around 7:45 p.m., and there was no immediate word on the conditions of those aboard. The FAA and the National Transportation Safety Board are investigating. The crash occurred as New England and much of the country grappled with a massive winter storm. Bangor had undergone steady snowfall Sunday along with many other parts of the country. The airport issued a statement that emergency crews were on the scene at the airport, which was closed after what it described as an incident involving a single aircraft departing the airport. Bangor International Airport offers direct flights to cities like Orlando, Florida, Washington, D.C., and Charlotte, North Carolina, and is located about 200 miles (320 kilometers) north of Boston. Throughout the weekend, the vast storm dumped sleet, freezing rain and snow across much of the eastern half of the U.S., halting much air and road traffic and knocking out power to hundreds of thousands of homes and businesses in the Southeast. Commercial air traffic was also heavily disrupted around much of the U.S. Some 12,000 flights were canceled Sunday and nearly 20,000 were delayed, according to the flight tracker  . Airports in Philadelphia, Washington, Baltimore, North Carolina, New York and New Jersey were among those impacted. The Bombardier Challenger 600 is a wide-bodied business jet configured for nine to 11 passengers. It was launched in 1980 as the first private jet with a “walk-about cabin” and remains a popular charter option, according to
    0 Comments 0 Shares 214 Views 0 Reviews
  • Battle for the soul of Democrats seen through prism of bitter Senate primaries
    This is performative politics again.

    A renewed power struggle is playing out among Democrats, following a string of off-year overperformances in 2025 after bruising losses in 2024.

    The battle for the soul of the party is most acute in a series of contentious Senate primaries that will soon determine whether the establishment’s more centrist candidates will square off against Republicans in November, or whether the party’s more progressive upstarts will.

    Rivalry outcomes in battleground toss-ups such as Maine and Michigan will have particular influence over the party’s broader strategy heading into the midterm elections to claw back control in Washington and how it approaches resisting President Donald Trump.

    But so too will competitive Democratic contests in states where the general elections are not as competitive, including Senate seats in left-leaning Minnesota and conservative Texas.

    “I don’t think the old paradigms really fit anymore. It isn’t really right or left,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), a leadership membership who’s backing more progressive candidates in Minnesota and Michigan, told the Washington Examiner. “It’s whether you sort of see the biggest fight as… sort of workers vs. corporations.”

    Will voters best reward candidates with more leftist views and blanket Trump resistance, or moderated pragmatism that includes working across the aisle and melding with the establishment?

    The party’s campaign arms, in this case the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, tend to bolster more establishment-aligned choices they feel have better odds in the general election, but are also less likely to create headaches for leadership once in Washington.

    Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has landed several top-tier recruits who fit the mold, including Gov. Janet Mills (D-ME) in Maine, former Gov. Roy Cooper in North Carolina, former Sen. Sherrod Brown in Ohio, and former Rep. Mary Peltola in Alaska. Or, as Schumer recently put it to Politico, “the four states we have to pick up to win back the Senate.”

    In addition to ideological differences, competitive primaries offer referendums on age. And while Schumer and the DSCC indicate their candidate of choice in Michigan is Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI), they’re largely keeping their powder dry in Minnesota and Texas.  

    “It’s a generational shift,” Democratic strategist Hank Sheinkopf, whose past clients include former President Bill Clinton and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, described the primaries more broadly. “They’re …
    Battle for the soul of Democrats seen through prism of bitter Senate primaries This is performative politics again. A renewed power struggle is playing out among Democrats, following a string of off-year overperformances in 2025 after bruising losses in 2024. The battle for the soul of the party is most acute in a series of contentious Senate primaries that will soon determine whether the establishment’s more centrist candidates will square off against Republicans in November, or whether the party’s more progressive upstarts will. Rivalry outcomes in battleground toss-ups such as Maine and Michigan will have particular influence over the party’s broader strategy heading into the midterm elections to claw back control in Washington and how it approaches resisting President Donald Trump. But so too will competitive Democratic contests in states where the general elections are not as competitive, including Senate seats in left-leaning Minnesota and conservative Texas. “I don’t think the old paradigms really fit anymore. It isn’t really right or left,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), a leadership membership who’s backing more progressive candidates in Minnesota and Michigan, told the Washington Examiner. “It’s whether you sort of see the biggest fight as… sort of workers vs. corporations.” Will voters best reward candidates with more leftist views and blanket Trump resistance, or moderated pragmatism that includes working across the aisle and melding with the establishment? The party’s campaign arms, in this case the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, tend to bolster more establishment-aligned choices they feel have better odds in the general election, but are also less likely to create headaches for leadership once in Washington. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has landed several top-tier recruits who fit the mold, including Gov. Janet Mills (D-ME) in Maine, former Gov. Roy Cooper in North Carolina, former Sen. Sherrod Brown in Ohio, and former Rep. Mary Peltola in Alaska. Or, as Schumer recently put it to Politico, “the four states we have to pick up to win back the Senate.” In addition to ideological differences, competitive primaries offer referendums on age. And while Schumer and the DSCC indicate their candidate of choice in Michigan is Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI), they’re largely keeping their powder dry in Minnesota and Texas.   “It’s a generational shift,” Democratic strategist Hank Sheinkopf, whose past clients include former President Bill Clinton and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, described the primaries more broadly. “They’re …
    0 Comments 0 Shares 169 Views 0 Reviews
  • Lord Ashcroft: My latest focus group – Tory voters have their say on recent defections
    This deserves loud pushback.

    Lord Ashcroft KCMG PC is an international businessman, philanthropist, author and pollster. For more information on his work, visit

    Following the recent spate of defections, I convened two focus groups of 2024 Conservative voters in Watford to hear what they made of it all. What does it say about the defectors, and the party they left behind? How did Kemi Badenoch handle it? And are they tempted to follow Messrs Jenrick, Zahawi and Rosindell to their new home?

    Few said they had voted Conservative in 2024 with any enthusiasm: “It was only because I felt like they were the best of a bad bunch;” “I didn’t want Labour getting in. But it’s not as if the Conservatives did an amazing job in the last few years. It’s been a complete shambles.”

    “She’s reinvigorating the party. But what goes behind that?”

    Most in the groups had a positive view of Kemi Badenoch: “I quite like her. She’s got balls;” “I feel that it needed fresh blood, and she has injected that;” “She’s quite quiet, but she’s articulate. I do like what she says;” “She’s a powerhouse.” However, there was a widespread feeling that she was fighting a lonely battle and needed more support: “She’s holding him to account and she’s really coming into herself. But that doesn’t mean she’s a brilliant party;” “She’s trying to make herself known, but whether she can do it on her own is questionable. I think she needs more backing from her party;” “The way she’s handling PMQs at the moment is excellent. I think that’s reinvigorating the party. But what goes behind that? That’s the thing.”

    Overall, these 2024 Tories thought the party was still some way from recovery:

    “There’s no stability within the group. And they haven’t really regrouped to bring anything that makes people sit up and listen;” “They might be moving in the right direction, but the pace is too slow;” “The problem for 14 years was complacency, and then they got smacked around the face. And then they were in shock;” “It’s going to take a lot of healing, a lot of time. I don’t think it’s going to be four years.”

    “They’re not thinking about us, they’re thinking about them”

    All the participants had picked up on the defections (though many couldn’t remember the names of the individuals concerned). They tended to think that the switchers, including Jenrick, had been motivated by career ambition, resentment or self-preservation rather than noble principle: “It seems like it’s their jobs they’re worried about. They’re not thinking about us, they’re thinking about them;” “I just think he’s really bitter;” “He left because he didn’t get what he wanted, to be prime minister. It was all about themselves. I think have a complete clear-out and start all over again;” “He’s left it 18 months to jump ship. If he felt that bad about it, …
    Lord Ashcroft: My latest focus group – Tory voters have their say on recent defections This deserves loud pushback. Lord Ashcroft KCMG PC is an international businessman, philanthropist, author and pollster. For more information on his work, visit Following the recent spate of defections, I convened two focus groups of 2024 Conservative voters in Watford to hear what they made of it all. What does it say about the defectors, and the party they left behind? How did Kemi Badenoch handle it? And are they tempted to follow Messrs Jenrick, Zahawi and Rosindell to their new home? Few said they had voted Conservative in 2024 with any enthusiasm: “It was only because I felt like they were the best of a bad bunch;” “I didn’t want Labour getting in. But it’s not as if the Conservatives did an amazing job in the last few years. It’s been a complete shambles.” “She’s reinvigorating the party. But what goes behind that?” Most in the groups had a positive view of Kemi Badenoch: “I quite like her. She’s got balls;” “I feel that it needed fresh blood, and she has injected that;” “She’s quite quiet, but she’s articulate. I do like what she says;” “She’s a powerhouse.” However, there was a widespread feeling that she was fighting a lonely battle and needed more support: “She’s holding him to account and she’s really coming into herself. But that doesn’t mean she’s a brilliant party;” “She’s trying to make herself known, but whether she can do it on her own is questionable. I think she needs more backing from her party;” “The way she’s handling PMQs at the moment is excellent. I think that’s reinvigorating the party. But what goes behind that? That’s the thing.” Overall, these 2024 Tories thought the party was still some way from recovery: “There’s no stability within the group. And they haven’t really regrouped to bring anything that makes people sit up and listen;” “They might be moving in the right direction, but the pace is too slow;” “The problem for 14 years was complacency, and then they got smacked around the face. And then they were in shock;” “It’s going to take a lot of healing, a lot of time. I don’t think it’s going to be four years.” “They’re not thinking about us, they’re thinking about them” All the participants had picked up on the defections (though many couldn’t remember the names of the individuals concerned). They tended to think that the switchers, including Jenrick, had been motivated by career ambition, resentment or self-preservation rather than noble principle: “It seems like it’s their jobs they’re worried about. They’re not thinking about us, they’re thinking about them;” “I just think he’s really bitter;” “He left because he didn’t get what he wanted, to be prime minister. It was all about themselves. I think have a complete clear-out and start all over again;” “He’s left it 18 months to jump ship. If he felt that bad about it, …
    0 Comments 0 Shares 193 Views 0 Reviews
  • Clinton and Obama criticize federal agents over Alex Pretti shooting
    Every delay has consequences.

    Former Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama released statements on Sunday critical of the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti by a Border Patrol agent.

    Both presidents expressed sympathy over Pretti’s death and criticized the string of events that led to it. They also lamented the recent events in Minnesota and condemned the conduct and actions of federal agents. Both considered it a pivotal moment for the country’s future.

    “In recent weeks, we’ve watched horrible scenes play out in Minneapolis and other communities that I never thought would take place in America,” Clinton said in his statement. “People, including children, have been seized from their homes, workplaces, and the street by masked federal agents.”

    Over the course of a lifetime, we face only a few moments where the decisions we make and the actions we take will shape our history for years to come.  This is one of them.
    — Bill Clinton (@BillClinton) January 25, 2026

    “Peaceful protesters and citizens exercising their constitutional right to observe and document law enforcement have been arrested, beaten, teargassed, and most searingly, in the cases of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, shot and killed,” Clinton said.

    Obama expressed similar sentiments, calling Pretti’s death a “tragedy” and claiming the nation’s values were “under assault.”

    The killing of Alex Pretti is a heartbreaking tragedy. It should also be a wake-up call to every American, regardless of party, that many of our core values as a nation are increasingly under assault.
    — Barack Obama (@BarackObama) January 25, 2026

    “The killing of Alex Pretti is a heartbreaking tragedy,” said Obama. “It should also be a wake-up call to every American, regardless of party, that many of our core values as a nation are increasingly under assault.”

    He then proceeded to criticize federal law enforcement officials, claiming they engaged in reckless behavior “designed to intimidate and harass” while lacking “discipline and accountability.” He said that people were “rightly outraged” over the agents’ behavior amid recent events. 

    “For weeks now, people across the country have been rightly outraged by the spectacle of masked ICE recruits and other federal agents acting with impunity and engaging in tactics that seem designed to intimidate, harass, provoke, and endanger the residents of a major American city,” Obama said. “These unprecedented tactics — which even the former top lawyer of the …
    Clinton and Obama criticize federal agents over Alex Pretti shooting Every delay has consequences. Former Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama released statements on Sunday critical of the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti by a Border Patrol agent. Both presidents expressed sympathy over Pretti’s death and criticized the string of events that led to it. They also lamented the recent events in Minnesota and condemned the conduct and actions of federal agents. Both considered it a pivotal moment for the country’s future. “In recent weeks, we’ve watched horrible scenes play out in Minneapolis and other communities that I never thought would take place in America,” Clinton said in his statement. “People, including children, have been seized from their homes, workplaces, and the street by masked federal agents.” Over the course of a lifetime, we face only a few moments where the decisions we make and the actions we take will shape our history for years to come.  This is one of them. — Bill Clinton (@BillClinton) January 25, 2026 “Peaceful protesters and citizens exercising their constitutional right to observe and document law enforcement have been arrested, beaten, teargassed, and most searingly, in the cases of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, shot and killed,” Clinton said. Obama expressed similar sentiments, calling Pretti’s death a “tragedy” and claiming the nation’s values were “under assault.” The killing of Alex Pretti is a heartbreaking tragedy. It should also be a wake-up call to every American, regardless of party, that many of our core values as a nation are increasingly under assault. — Barack Obama (@BarackObama) January 25, 2026 “The killing of Alex Pretti is a heartbreaking tragedy,” said Obama. “It should also be a wake-up call to every American, regardless of party, that many of our core values as a nation are increasingly under assault.” He then proceeded to criticize federal law enforcement officials, claiming they engaged in reckless behavior “designed to intimidate and harass” while lacking “discipline and accountability.” He said that people were “rightly outraged” over the agents’ behavior amid recent events.  “For weeks now, people across the country have been rightly outraged by the spectacle of masked ICE recruits and other federal agents acting with impunity and engaging in tactics that seem designed to intimidate, harass, provoke, and endanger the residents of a major American city,” Obama said. “These unprecedented tactics — which even the former top lawyer of the …
    0 Comments 0 Shares 117 Views 0 Reviews
  • Trump’s NATO warning pushes Europe to face the cost of defending itself
    Who's accountable for the results?

    Speaking to global leaders in Davos, Switzerland, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy delivered a blunt warning to Europe about its self-defense.  
    "Europe needs to know how to defend itself," he said, arguing that the continent still isn’t ready to stand on its own without U.S. backing.
    Zelensky’s remarks reflected a growing anxiety across Europe — that decades of reliance on American protection left the continent ill-prepared for a more dangerous era. While European countries have contributed troops, weapons and money to conflicts from Afghanistan to Ukraine, the ultimate backstop for NATO’s security has remained Washington.
    President Donald Trump has openly challenged that assumption, repeatedly warning NATO allies that U.S. protection should not be taken for granted, and insisting the U.S. needed to take Greenland from Denmark
    Before he ruled out the use of force to wrest control of the island, European officials had worried about a military dust-up between Western powers would mean the end of NATO.
    "Maybe we should have put NATO to the test: Invoked Article 5, and forced NATO to come here and protect our Southern Border from further Invasions of Illegal Immigrants, thus freeing up large numbers of Border Patrol Agents for other tasks," Trump mused on Truth Social Thursday.
    Trump’s suggestion that the U.S. may not defend allies that fail to invest in their own security rattled the alliance and pushed European governments to pledge sharp increases in defense spending.
    Even so, European leaders continue to acknowledge how central U.S. power remains to NATO’s defense. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has pointed to the American nuclear umbrella as the alliance’s "ultimate guarantor," alongside a strong U.S. conventional presence in Europe.
    "We are still having a strong, conventional U.S. presence in Europe," Rutte said, "and, of course, the nuclear umbrella as our ultimate guarantor."
    TRUMP: EUROPE WILL ‘TAKE A LOT OF THE BURDEN’ IN PROVIDING SECURITY GUARANTEES FOR UKRAINE
    Security analysts say that long-standing guarantee shaped Europe’s choices over time.
    "For much of the post–Cold War period, it is fair to say that Europeans underinvested in defense, partly because threats were low, and partly because a series of U.S. presidents did everything they could to convince Europeans that we would stay there forever," Barry Posen, a professor of political science at MIT, told Fox News Digital.
    "Trump was right to argue that Europeans have been slow to fix up their forces as the situation changed — as Russia pulled itself back together and became more …
    Trump’s NATO warning pushes Europe to face the cost of defending itself Who's accountable for the results? Speaking to global leaders in Davos, Switzerland, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy delivered a blunt warning to Europe about its self-defense.   "Europe needs to know how to defend itself," he said, arguing that the continent still isn’t ready to stand on its own without U.S. backing. Zelensky’s remarks reflected a growing anxiety across Europe — that decades of reliance on American protection left the continent ill-prepared for a more dangerous era. While European countries have contributed troops, weapons and money to conflicts from Afghanistan to Ukraine, the ultimate backstop for NATO’s security has remained Washington. President Donald Trump has openly challenged that assumption, repeatedly warning NATO allies that U.S. protection should not be taken for granted, and insisting the U.S. needed to take Greenland from Denmark Before he ruled out the use of force to wrest control of the island, European officials had worried about a military dust-up between Western powers would mean the end of NATO. "Maybe we should have put NATO to the test: Invoked Article 5, and forced NATO to come here and protect our Southern Border from further Invasions of Illegal Immigrants, thus freeing up large numbers of Border Patrol Agents for other tasks," Trump mused on Truth Social Thursday. Trump’s suggestion that the U.S. may not defend allies that fail to invest in their own security rattled the alliance and pushed European governments to pledge sharp increases in defense spending. Even so, European leaders continue to acknowledge how central U.S. power remains to NATO’s defense. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has pointed to the American nuclear umbrella as the alliance’s "ultimate guarantor," alongside a strong U.S. conventional presence in Europe. "We are still having a strong, conventional U.S. presence in Europe," Rutte said, "and, of course, the nuclear umbrella as our ultimate guarantor." TRUMP: EUROPE WILL ‘TAKE A LOT OF THE BURDEN’ IN PROVIDING SECURITY GUARANTEES FOR UKRAINE Security analysts say that long-standing guarantee shaped Europe’s choices over time. "For much of the post–Cold War period, it is fair to say that Europeans underinvested in defense, partly because threats were low, and partly because a series of U.S. presidents did everything they could to convince Europeans that we would stay there forever," Barry Posen, a professor of political science at MIT, told Fox News Digital. "Trump was right to argue that Europeans have been slow to fix up their forces as the situation changed — as Russia pulled itself back together and became more …
    0 Comments 0 Shares 121 Views 0 Reviews
Demur US https://www.demur.us