USS Carrier Gerald R Ford with its crew of 5,000 returns home from the Middle East deployment.

Main stream media wonders when the war is going to end.

The war has ended. Iran is shut off financially and politically from the rest of the world, with exceptions from some European countries, like France and Germany. The regime is dying and it is clinging to power in its last days. Changes are coming to Iran!

Troops are coming home!

Blessings, y'all! 🙏
Enjoy the call and pray along with us for the restoration of the U.S. as a nation literally united under God.

Democrat leaders absent on the National day of prayer, repentance, humility, and rededication of America to God.

There were no prominent Democrats who participated in the "Rededicate 250" prayer and rededication event held on the National Mall on May 17, 2026. 

The event featured conservative Christian leaders and Republican officials, including:
Mike Johnson, House Speaker
Tim Scott, Republican Senator
Pete Hegseth, Secretary of Defense
Marco Rubio, Secretary of State (via video)
Donald Trump (via video) 

While the lineup included some religious figures such as Rabbi Meir Soloveichik and Cardinal Timothy Dolan, political participation was limited to Republicans. Critics noted this absence alongside the lack of representation from mainline Protestant denominations, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and the religiously unaffiliated. And critics and other religious figures do not worship the God under whom American was found.

The DOJ is quietly dropping its January 6 report — and exposing exactly where the real insurrection originated.

The FBI had 26 agents undercover as confidential human sources.

CNN's projects that Ed Gallrein defeated incumbent Representative Thomas Massie in the Republican primary for Kentucky’s 4th Congressional District. The race was viewed as a significant test of President Donald Trump's influence within the Republican Party.

Key Highlights:

Trump's Influence: Despite President Trump's national poll numbers being low, the results in this district demonstrate his continued strong grip on the Republican primary electorate (3:29).

The Candidates: Ed Gallrein, a former Navy SEAL and farmer, was endorsed by President Trump and received heavy financial support from his allies (0:04, 3:58).

The Campaign: This race was noted as the most expensive U.S. House primary in American history, characterized by an "overwhelming deluge" of negative ads and mailers (1:05, 7:10).

Why Massie Lost: Thomas Massie, an incumbent who had previously won his district comfortably, faced criticism for being a "chief antagonist" to President Trump in the House, specifically breaking with the party on issues like the debt, tax cuts, and immigration (1:28, 2:35).

Election Results: Ed Gallrein secured a victory, with Thomas Massie winning only his home county, Lewis County (4:20, 6:44). The defeat represents the latest success in President Trump's "retribution tour" against critics within his own party (7:27).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_Th8KzNK4c

Vice President JD Vance held a press briefing at the White House, stepping in for Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt. The briefing covered several key administration policy areas and current events:

Task Force to Eliminate Fraud: Vance discussed the White House Task Force to Eliminate Fraud, emphasizing their work in identifying and prosecuting fraudulent Small Business Administration loans (0:49 - 2:06). He framed fraud as a two-fold crime against taxpayers and the intended beneficiaries of government programs.

Iran Negotiations: Addressing the conflict with Iran, Vance outlined two potential paths: continuing to negotiate in good faith to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, or resuming a military campaign to achieve American objectives (2:08 - 5:07). He stated that while the administration prefers a diplomatic solution, they remain "locked and loaded" if necessary.

$1.8 Billion "Anti-Weaponization" Fund: A significant portion of the Q&A addressed the new $1.8 billion fund established following a settlement with the IRS. Vance clarified that the fund is intended to compensate those who were unfairly targeted by "lawfare" under the previous administration and stressed that applications will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis (10:38 - 15:52).

Other Topics:

Fentanyl and China: Vance addressed the issue of fentanyl and discussed ongoing diplomatic efforts with China (16:15 - 19:12).

Artificial Intelligence: The administration’s approach to AI focuses on fostering innovation while protecting data and addressing potential cybersecurity risks associated with new models like Mythos (19:18 - 21:59).

Foreign Policy and Troops in Poland: Vance explained that the recent decision to delay a troop rotation to Poland was not a reduction in support, but rather part of a broader push for European nations to take more responsibility for their own territorial sovereignty (29:39 - 33:22).

Economic Concerns: Vance defended the administration's economic record, citing tax cuts on tips, overtime, and social security as evidence of their commitment to prosperity, even as he acknowledged current public frustration with inflation and gas prices (42:04 - 43:10).

Vice President JD Vance provided several details regarding the $1.8 billion 'Anti-Weaponization' fund during the press briefing:

Purpose and Eligibility: Vance stated the fund is designed to compensate Americans who were subjected to 'lawfare' and mistreatment by the government under the previous administration. He noted that the fund is open to any applicant—including Republicans, Democrats, and independents—provided they go through a vetting process (11:06 - 11:32, 13:30 - 13:40).

Case-by-Case Evaluation: Addressing concerns about who might receive money, Vance emphasized that the administration will not automatically approve claims. Instead, every application will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to determine if the individual was truly mistreated or unfairly prosecuted (14:27 - 14:42, 33:35 - 34:08).

Use of Funds: Vance clarified that none of the money from the fund goes to Donald Trump, the Trump administration, or the President's family. He described the payments as a form of government compensation for legal expenses and injustices incurred by individuals (11:53 - 12:04, 36:27 - 36:48).

Distinction from Violent Offenders: When asked if individuals who assaulted police officers would be eligible, Vance responded that the goal is not to reward those who broke the law, but to provide justice for those who were victims of disproportionate or political prosecutions. He maintained that the vetting process will handle these specific details (13:59 - 14:26, 33:35 - 33:53).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5qmuSroaJU

Join us for Nightly J6 updates and Live prayers at 9:20 PM ET!

9:20 PM - 10:00 PM Eastern — Praise, Prayer, Petitions with brief updates on global and local events

10:00 PM onwards — Readings in Scriptures, fellowship, discussions, more prayers


🙏🙏https://t.me/ThePrisonersRecord?livestream

🙏 🙏 🙏
Blessings, fam!

In this interview (0:00-5:14), Vice President JD Vance defends the newly established $1.776 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund.” Created as part of a settlement regarding a lawsuit over the leak of Donald Trump’s tax returns, the fund is intended to compensate individuals who claim they were unfairly targeted or prosecuted for political reasons by the previous administration—a concept Vance refers to as "lawfare."

Key takeaways from the discussion include:

Purpose and Administration: Vance characterizes the fund as a way to "turn the page" on what the administration views as politically motivated prosecutions (0:34-0:49). He emphasizes that the fund is open to anyone—including Democrats—and will be subject to a vetting process to evaluate the legitimacy of claims on a case-by-case basis (0:39-1:01, 3:51-4:05).

Potential for Jan. 6th Recipients: When pressed on whether individuals convicted of violence during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol would be eligible for payouts, Vance declined to rule it out (3:22-3:50, 4:39-5:04). While stating that the goal is not to reward those who attacked police, he argued that the justice system must be evaluated case-by-case, noting that some individuals may have been disproportionately prosecuted or treated unfairly (3:22-3:45, 4:45-5:00).

Contrasting Views on Legal Fairness: Vance cites the case of Tina Peters as an example of a situation where he believes the prosecution was "completely disproportionate" to the alleged crime (1:35-2:02). He frames the initiative as a necessary correction for government overreach, contrasting it with the administration's stated desire to only prosecute those who truly broke the law, regardless of their political views (2:28-2:48).

This initiative has faced significant scrutiny from critics who characterize it as a "slush fund" for political allies, while the administration maintains it is a necessary effort to restore fairness to the Department of Justice.

The dialogue centers on the purpose of the new 'Anti-Weaponization Fund' and the criteria for potential compensation. Vice President JD Vance argues that the fund is intended to compensate individuals who were subjected to 'lawfare' and unfair prosecution by the previous administration (0:34-0:37, 2:46-2:48).

Regarding the distinction between the accused and the convicted, Vance emphasizes the following points:

Presumption of Innocence: Vance highlights that in the U.S. legal system, individuals are 'innocent until proven guilty,' noting that even those accused of serious crimes, such as attacking law enforcement, may have claims that warrant consideration (3:36-3:45).

Case-by-Case Evaluation: He states that the administration is not offering blanket payouts. Instead, they plan to evaluate every claim on a 'case-by-case basis' to determine if an individual was truly mistreated by the legal system, regardless of the specific accusations against them (3:51-3:54, 4:46-4:58).

Correction of Wrongful Prosecution: The core objective of the fund, according to Vance, is to 'correct a wrong' where individuals were targeted or had 'the book thrown at them' due to political viewpoints rather than legitimate criminal behavior (3:29-3:33, 4:06-4:18).

Vance maintains that he is not committing to provide money to any specific group, including those involved in the Jan. 6 Capitol attack, but is instead committing to a rigorous review process for those claiming to be victims of past government overreach (4:59-5:14).

Isn't Donald J. Trump the best president ever!?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVKIClTVnjQ

Here’s an affidavit from one of the MPD sergeants that arrived before you, Officer Daniel Thau, another guilty of wanton violence entitled to no qualified immunity (was warned by other officers on bodycam).

It supports a weaponization fund for J6ers.

1. https://x.com/InvestigateJ6/status/2057134011735314896?s=20

2. https://x.com/InvestigateJ6/status/1618655913870790658?s=20

2 officers who clashed with rioters on January 6 sue to block DOJ "anti-weaponization" fund.

Two law enforcement officers who clashed with rioters at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, sued Wednesday to block the Trump administration's $1.7 billion "anti-weaponization fund," which was created this week as part of a settlement between President Trump and the federal government.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in the District of Columbia by retired U.S. Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn and Metropolitan Police Department officer Daniel Hodges, asks a federal judge to find the creation of the fund illegal and reverse any transfers that the Treasury Department has made to the Justice Department to implement it.

Both Dunn and Hodges defended the U.S. Capitol after a mob of Trump supporters attempted to stop the certification of the Electoral College on Jan. 6.

The fund was announced Monday by the Justice Department. In a statement, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said the fund would "provide a systematic process to hear and redress claims of others who suffered weaponization and lawfare."

Since the announcement, attorneys representing those claiming the government was weaponized against them have begun scrambling to position their clients for payouts.

Jan. 6 rioters — including those convicted of the most violent behavior during the attack but later pardoned by Mr. Trump — could likely apply for payouts. High-profile former Trump administration and campaign officials who sued the Justice Department before reaching their own settlement agreements may also be eligible to receive payments from the fund.

Neither Blanche nor the White House has said outright that they would oppose payouts from the fund to those convicted — and since pardoned — of assaulting law enforcement officers. The Justice Department has not disclosed any criteria regarding who would be eligible for a settlement or whether there would be a cap on the amount of money they could receive. Blanche said at a Senate hearing this week that the five-member commission that will make up the fund's board would supply that information.
"By creating the Anti-Weaponization Fund, funding it, and authorizing claim criteria that will allow it to make payments to, among others, Proud Boys and January 6 rioters, Defendants have inflicted concrete and cognizable harms on Plaintiffs Dunn and Hodges," the officers argued in their complaint. "The Fund's mere existence sends a clear and chilling message: those who enact violence in President Trump's name will not just avoid punishment, they will be rewarded with riches."

"This Fund creates enormous physical dangers for Officers Dunn and Hodges, who risked their lives on January 6, 2021, and who continue to do so by refusing to let that day be forgotten," wrote Public Integrity Project founder Brendan Ballou, who represents the officers. "The Fund is stunningly, blindingly illegal, and the defendants must be prohibited from transferring money to this corrupt and illegal monstrosity."

The settlement stemmed from a $10 billion lawsuit filed earlier this year in federal court by Mr. Trump, who accused the agencies of unlawfully allowing a government contractor to leak his tax returns and those of his sons and his company. He alleged the government's mishandling led to the improper disclosure of the tax documents to media outlets in 2020. His sons, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., and the Trump Organization were also plaintiffs in the suit.
Mr. Trump and his legal team also agreed to drop their administrative claims against the Justice Department after he asked the government to pay him about $230 million to settle two federal damage claims over investigations targeting him during his first administration or the Biden administration, the department said.

The settlement also permanently bars the IRS from pursuing claims against Mr. Trump or his company based on prior tax returns.

Attorney Jonathan Gross believes that J6ers should not have to apply for the $1.776 billion compensation fund because the DOJ has all the records and knew exactly what they did. This will be his argument to Todd Blanche and the compensation committee.

Jon has represented many J6ers, often pro bono, since the start of J6. He will continue to do so pro bono. If you would like his help to navigate through the compensation fight, please contact him:

Law Office of Jonathan Gross
2833 Smith Ave.
Suite 331
Baltimore, MD 21209

Office: (443) 813-0141

jonathansgross@gmail.com

One Republican congressman says he is exploring ways to end the Trump Justice Department’s move to establish a tax-payer fueled “anti-weaponization” fund, a move likely to draw the ire of President Donald Trump.

Pennsylvania GOP Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick told reporters he “100%” wants to prevent the nearly $1.8 billion fund that could compensate Trump’s allies from moving forward.

“Once we get to the bottom of the source of the funding, we’re going to put legislative text together. We got to figure out what we have jurisdiction over. That’s the first question,” he said Wednesday, later sending a letter to the Justice Department demanding answers about the fund.

Fitzpatrick, a moderate who represents a district that voted for Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election, was the first in his party to publicly reject the fund outright and vow to stop it. He has recently bucked some of Trump’s other priorities – like funding for his East Wing ballroom – and provoked the president’s threat of backing a primary opponent against him.

A number of Republicans across the Capitol, however, were scrambling behind the scenes to learn more about the fund and what oversight role they can play, underscoring how lawmakers in the president’s own party are often left in the dark about key administration moves.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune said that he expects scrutiny over the fund to occur through the appropriations process for the next fiscal year.

“My assumption is that, based on some of the blowback that’s come since this was announced, that there would be a significant amount of attention paid to it,” Thune told reporters Tuesday.

Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins pressed acting Attorney General Todd Blanche for more details in a Senate hearing on Tuesday, asking how much will be paid for each claim, the legal basis for those decisions and whether the information related to the claims will be publicly available.

Blanche acknowledged that the creation of the fund “is unusual” but argued that “it is not unprecedented.”

The DOJ’s announcement earlier this week outlines that the money to enact these settlements will come from a permanent appropriation already established for the department to settle cases, called the judgment fund. According to the department, the attorney general will appoint five board members to oversee the fund, one of whom will be chosen “in consultation” with congressional leadership.

But House Speaker Mike Johnson said Wednesday that “we don’t know any of the details of that settlement fund.”

A source with experience settling federal employment cases noted that the judgment fund already exists to handle such settlements, arguing that the establishment of the so-called anti-weaponization fund felt more like an overblown press release with political ramifications and saying it does not change the legal process.

Still, most Republicans are trying to learn the basics about the fund given they were not consulted ahead of time.

House Oversight Chair James Comer said he did not know anything about the fund until he read news reports about it.

House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole, meanwhile, told CNN he was not consulted or given any heads up about the administration’s creation of this fund or how it would be used and said he was looking into whether any legislative action is required.

“I don’t know anything about it. I haven’t seen it yet. I don’t know what it is legislatively. So I really don’t have anything to say,” Cole said.

Join us for Nightly J6 updates and Live prayers at 9:20 PM ET!

9:20 PM - 10:00 PM Eastern — Praise, Prayer, Petitions with brief updates on global and local events

10:00 PM onwards — Readings in Scriptures, fellowship, discussions, more prayers


🙏🙏https://t.me/ThePrisonersRecord?livestream