11 posts from Sunday, March 29, 2026

All right, breaking tonight. We are learning that Bill Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, has a letter to the DOJ referring New York Attorney General Letitia James for a criminal referral over her insurance fraud. Now, the DOJ has confirmed they received that referral. We did reach out to Letitia James in our office for comment. We have yet to hear back with all the details. He is the founder, editor-in-chief, chief investigator, reporter, JustTheNews.com. John Solomon is here with the very latest. This is a blockbuster based on what I've seen with these documents. Yeah, the documents are very clear. The evidence is very strong. Some of it is court records. So Bill Pulte did his homework. New York's top cop is in a world of trouble. This is a very serious legal referral. If you remember last year, there was a referral made for mortgage fraud. It led to an indictment, but then the indictment got thrown out by a judge on the grounds that the U.S. attorney wasn't lawfully appointed there. That will not be the case where these two referrals are being sent. They're being sent to Chicago, where all state insurance is located, in Florida, where a second insurance company where Letitia James took out her homeowner's insurance was based. Both have sitting U.S. attorneys. Both have juries with a long history of sending politicians to prison when they believe they've engaged in corrupt acts. And both are getting referrals that have very specific information that Letitia James filled out insurance applications for her home in Virginia, claiming that it would not be occupied for five months of year. That probably got her a better rate. And in fact, the house was occupied around a year by a niece and a family member. And so the evidence is strong. The jurisdictions have a long history of convicting politicians if they think that they've done something corrupt. And both of the U.S. attorneys are confirmed by the Senate. So that's a big deal. By the way, the one in Florida is going to the same U.S. attorney that's doing the grand conspiracy case looking at weaponization, Jason Canones. That's another big thing. A lot of resources down in that office.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

Good morning director if you'll let me quickly summarize your opening statement this morning You said in volume one on the issue of conspiracy the special counsel Determined that the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign Conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities and then in volume two For reasons that you explained the special counsel did not make a determination On whether there was an obstruction of justice crime committed by the president. Is that fair? Yes, sir All right now in explaining the special counsel did not make what you called a traditional prosecution or declination decision The report on the bottom of page two of volume two reads as follows The evidence we obtained about the president's actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from Conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred accordingly while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime It also does not exonerate him the special counsel's job. Nowhere does it say that you were to conclusively determine Donald Trump's innocence Or that the special counsel report should determine whether or not to exonerate him. It's not in any of the documents It's not in your appointment order. It's not in the special counsel regulations. It's not in the OLC opinions It's not in the Justice Manual and it's not in the principles of federal prosecution Nowhere do those words appear together because respectfully respectfully director It was not the special counsel's job to conclusively determine Donald Trump's innocence or to exonerate him Because the bedrock principle of our justice system is a presumption of innocence It exists for everyone. Everyone is entitled to it including sitting presidents and because there is a presumption of innocence prosecutors never ever Need to conclusively determine it now director the special counsel applied This inverted burden of proof that I can't find and you said doesn't exist anywhere in the department policies and you used it to write a report and the very first line of Your report the very first line of your report says and you as you read this morning It authorizes a special counsel to provide the attorney general with a confidential report Explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the special counsel. That's the very first word of your report, right? That's correct Here's the problem director. The special counsel didn't do that on Volume 2 with respect to potential of obstruction of justice the special counsel made neither a prosecution Decision or a declination decision. You made no decision You told us this morning and in your report that you made no determination. So respectfully director You didn't follow the special counsel regulations. It clearly says Write a confidential report about decisions reached nowhere in here Does it say write a report about decisions that weren't reached you wrote 180 pages? 180 pages about decisions that weren't reached about potential crimes that weren't charged or decided and respectfully Respectfully by doing that you managed to violate every principle and the most sacred of traditions about prosecutors not offering extra prosecutorial analysis about potential crimes that aren't charged so Americans need to know this as they listen to the Democrats and socialists on the other side of the aisle as they do dramatic readings from This report that volume two of this report was not authorized Under the law to be written It was written to a legal standard that does not exist at the Justice Department and it was written in violation of every DOJ principle About extra prosecutorial commentary. I agree with the chairman this morning when he said Donald Trump is not above the law He's not but he damn sure shouldn't be below the law

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

I don't care about the Democrats. The Democrats hate our country. The Democrats are in chaos right now, and they have no common sense. You know, they have one quality that's amazing. They stick together. And it's harder because they stick together a ridiculous policy like men playing in women's sports, open borders for everybody, including murderers and anybody else that want it. We're open to you. Come in, murderers. You know why they do that? They do that for a couple of reasons, but they do it for votes because they think they're gonna vote for the Democrats, even though I did great with a Hispanic vote, tremendous with Hispanic vote. You know, I turned that whole thing around. The Hispanics like me and I like them. And you know, it's interesting with Hispanics. When I built the wall, everybody said, oh, that's gonna ruin us for the Hispanic. It was just the opposite. They know all about immigration, and they know all about death and crime, and they're smart people, and they have common sense. They wanted to be protected from the people that were coming into our country. So you know, I won the election with a very tremendous Hispanic vote, and I think it's higher now than it was then. So we're a party of common sense. The Democrats are a party of insanity. They're a party that will destroy our country. If I didn't win this election, I believe our country would have been destroyed by now. One year, this order would have taken. If you had Kamala or a sleepy Joe, either one, it wouldn't have mattered. They're the same thing. Two sleepy people, two stupid people. I believe, and by the way, Gavin Newsom, who is one of the candidates, I believe he took himself out of the running when he says he is, he suffers from mental disability. And a reporter said it was terrible that I talked that way about somebody with mental disability. I said, no problem with it, but I don't want a person with mental disability to be my president. I mean, you don't want to have a person with mental disability being a president. And Gavin Newsom said that he can't read a speech. He can't do almost anything. And then he said he's as dumb as all the people in the room, and he got accused of being a racist, which was an amazing set. I thought it was the worst interview I've ever seen anybody give. He's actually a very stupid person. So I believe he's out of the running. I think that that statement, that interview, he admitted that he's a stupid person. I don't want a stupid person being president. You know, I'll say it right now. I say it because no press ever reports it. I'm the only president that ever took a cognitive test. I took it three times. It's actually a very hard test for a lot of people. It wasn't hard for me, but it's a cognitive test starts off with an easy question. And by the time you get to the middle, get suffered by the time you get to the end, very few people can answer those questions. You get very tough mathematical equations and things. I took it three times. I aced it all three times in front of numerous doctors that I have no idea who they are. And I was told when I went in, I said, Doc Ronnie told me this. My current doctors were fantastic doctors. They said, Well, if you take it, you know, it's Walter Reed. It's essentially a public hospital. And if you do badly, it's probably gonna get out. But I aced it. I got them all right. And one doctor said, I've never seen anybody get them all right. I've been doing the test for 20 years. I want people I would love to see anybody that's a president or a vice president or anybody that has any chance of being a president. I would like to see them take a cognitive test because we had a man in this office that had no clue what was happening. And let me give you a little secret. He wasn't a smart man 30 years ago. I'll tell you about President Obama. He wasn't a smart man either. I know all about him. He wasn't a smart man, highly overrated. He was a great divider. And our country can't go through that anymore. Can't go through. We have done an amazing job. I had to do a little stopover. I call it an excursion. I had to do a little stopover in Iran and we had to knock the hell out of him because our country would not have been safe. The world wouldn't have been safe. I've done a great favor for the world. The world has not been. It has not been reciprocal because when I told NATO where we give millions and billions of dollars, trillions over the years, I said, Do you mind coming up and giving us a little hand with the streets? Send up some. They didn't want to get involved. And I believe that's gonna cost them dearly. Thank you very much, everybody.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

I mean, I am one of many American conservatives who found him to be pretty repugnant when he first came on the scene in 2016, when the way that he talks, the way that he does negotiation, the way that he talks about war and peace, and life and death is sometimes overly strong. But what Donald Trump has done around the entire world is he has asked for people to advocate for themselves, actually stand up for themselves, and fight, fight, fight. That is his whole thing. And when you look at someone like Marco Rubio. Although to be clear, when it came to January the 6th, he didn't say fight, fight, fight. That's what we're going to be seeing in trouble, but carry on. But no, that's what he said when he got shot in the year. He got shot in the year, he stood up and yelled fight, fight, fight. Yeah, good point. But when you look at what he did with Marco Rubio, Marco Rubio was one of his foils in 2016. He was a good conservative, a good boy, but he was a squish, and he rolled right over him. According to Marco Rubio today, Donald Trump has taught him how to fight and how to stand up for himself and dismantle people in an argument. And he wants that from Europe. He wants that from the UK. He wants these people to be allies who will defend themselves and be pugnacious and willing to fight like Netanyahu does. Do you know what it is? I think he smells confidence. He smells confidence across the room. I was there today in that cabinet room. It was amazing. What an honor. What an privilege to be amongst those phenomenal human beings there. And you can see him look across the room and he gravitates towards people who he thinks are happy in their own skin. You don't see it at all, do you? Well, I think President Trump certainly has a lot of powerful political characteristics. He has had an ability to message and drive a message that I haven't seen really in any politician, for the exception of President Obama, if you look at the two seminal political figures of Stephen and I's lifetime, or like just the last 50 years, it would be President Obama and President Trump. I would say this though, I think sometimes the skills that get you where you are can also be the skills that lead to your downfall. And his ability to dig in and fight on things is certainly a skill that was able to get him back into the White House. But I also think they're missing a key point here, which is the Iran war is unpopular. There's a lot of talk about, well, what does the MAGA base think about it? Well, the MAGA base is 25, 30% of the entire US population. Look at the broader polling. The broader polling shows that this war is very unpopular. And the issue Trump has is that to accomplish the objectives he says he wants accomplished, taking out the regime and getting rid of the nuclear program, hold on, taking out the regime or getting rid of the nuclear program is going to require boots on the ground, something he campaigned against, and it would be a major escalation. And then even if we get rid of the regime, that is going to open up a huge box of issues. And every week that goes by where we don't have an end to this war, the economic pain is going to mount. And a recent Reuters poll showed that the Americans are more unhappy with this economy now under Trump than they were with Biden. So I think the Trump administration and President Trump needs to take a step back and see digging in their heels and fighting on every topic might not be the right strategy. Yeah, but that point about them wanting to change the regime, they have been crystal clear that that is not their aim. Hang on, hang on. Caroline Levitt said in the briefing room yesterday when she was asked about that, she said, "Of course, we want somebody in charge who is more favorable, who doesn't chance death to America." She said, "Of course we would want that." But she said their entire leadership has changed, but it is too soon to say if we will be happy with the new regime. Well, Bev, I would say I was on the show with you for the six hours, I don't know how you did it, when this war started. And GB News platformed a ton of guests who were in favor of this war, and they didn't have a fetish for destroying the Navy. What they wanted to do, and they repeatedly said, was regime change. GB News interviewed a ton of people who talked about how we need to get rid of this regime, and the Trump administration parroted that line, and they talked about getting rid of the nuclear program. Now, what's going to happen is the Trump administration might need to claim that getting rid of their Navy is the only thing they wanted to do, because that's the best way to back out. There's minor success, and then there's total success. Minor success with Chuck Schumer got himself into trouble when he couldn't articulate this on Morning Joe. The Senate Majority Leader of the Democrats was asked, "Would it be a good thing if Iran had no naval or military capacity at the end of this thing?" And he was like, "Well, we can't really say, because we don't know what's going to happen." No, it is actually just... Because he's a Democrat. It is just a good thing that Iran is feckless and weak compared to its neighbors. Not just Israel, but the Qataris, the Emiratis, the Saudis, none of these people actually like the Iranian regime, it's good that they are completely decimated militarily. But the total victory, of course, would be regime change, and regime change can either be a change of heart within the regime, that they're going to act differently, or the Iranian people install leaders that might bring them back to the days before the Iranian Revolution.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.