(Note: Thank you for supporting businesses like those presenting a sponsored message below and ordering through the links below, which benefits Gateway Pundit. We appreciate your support!)

Adobe Acrobat Pro has long been the gold standard for professional PDF tools — but access usually costs a hefty $239.88 per year. Thanks to this exclusive deal, you can lock in three years of Acrobat Pro 2024 for just $89.99 (Reg. $543.99). And as a bonus, you’ll also get a lifetime license to Microsoft Office Professional 2021 for Windows at no extra charge.

Unlike basic PDF tools, Acrobat Pro lets you do everything from editing, converting, and combining files to redacting sensitive information and adding legally binding e-signatures. You can even create smart fillable forms and track documents in real time — all from the same app trusted by enterprises, law firms, and creative professionals worldwide.

This version of Acrobat Pro is the full desktop application, not a watered-down web version. You don’t need an internet connection to use it, and you won’t pay a subscription fee during your 3-year license.

Microsoft Office Included for Life

To sweeten the deal, this bundle also includes Microsoft Office Professional 2021 for Windows, a one-time download that gives you lifetime access to Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook, Publisher, Access, and Teams (basic). No ongoing fees, no renewal prompts.

This deal is only available through StackSocial and won’t be found on Adobe’s site or anywhere else.

Get 3 Years of Acrobat Pro + Lifetime Microsoft Office for $89.99 (Reg. $543.99).

StackSocial prices subject to change.

The post Pay Once for 3 Years of Adobe Acrobat Pro + Get Microsoft Office for Life — 83% Off appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Czech President Petr Pavel stated that Ukraine may need to make territorial concessions to achieve a peace agreement with Russia, despite such actions conflicting with international law.

He described, in an interview with the Czech newspaper Seznam Zprávy, that this as a practical acknowledgment of the current battlefield realities where Russia controls certain territories.

Pavel emphasized that any deal should view these territories as temporarily occupied rather than permanently Russian.

The president suggested that these concessions could serve as a lesser evil compared to prolonging the conflict, which would lead to more deaths and destruction.

He clarified that the specifics of any territorial agreement remain solely between Ukraine and Russia. Pavel refrained from offering advice on which areas should be retained or surrendered, noting it exceeds external authorities.

Regarding peacekeeping, Pavel indicated that if international forces are deployed under a temporary agreement, the Czech Republic should participate due to its early and active support for Ukraine.

He mentioned the possibility of creating a demilitarized zone along the contact line, monitored by technical and physical means. The exact nature of Czech involvement would depend on the agreement’s terms, potentially including roles like training or demining.

Czech Defense Minister Jana Cernochova previously stated that sending soldiers to Ukraine is not currently under consideration, but if it occurs, it might resemble past missions in Yugoslavia away from front lines.

Pavel noted Russia’s past opposition to foreign troops but suggested attitudes might shift. Any deployment would require approval from the Czech government and parliament.

Pavel expressed optimism about ongoing negotiations on security guarantees for Ukraine, involving the United States, Europe, and Ukraine itself. He highlighted U.S. President Donald Trump’s meetings with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Russian President Vladimir Putin as steps toward potential talks.

He shared a cautious view similar to leaders like Finland’s Alexander Stubb and France’s Emmanuel Macron, warning against over-optimism about Russia’s willingness for quick peace.

Pavel pointed out that Putin could have ended the war earlier and that Russia’s current battlefield advantage might reduce its incentive to negotiate. Despite this, he urged continued efforts to advance the peace process.

Pavel also contended that earlier provision of advanced aid, such as armored vehicles, long-range ammunition, missiles, and aircraft, might have altered the war’s course.

He observed that while such support eventually materialized, the gradual approach extended the suffering. The president maintained that coordinated economic pressure from the U.S. and Europe could have compelled Russia to act sooner without risking broader conflict.

The post Czech President Suggests Ukraine Territorial Concessions to Achieve Peace with Russia appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

President Trump’s promise to crack down on both legal and illegal immigration appears to be working.

Vice President J.D. Vance told The Gateway Pundit’s Jim Hoft earlier this month that the US would see the first negative net migration in the United States in decades.

A study by the Pew Research Center has found that some 1.5 million people have left the country between January and June of this year, marking the first fall in over five decades.

In June, the country was home to 51.9 million immigrants, a drop from 53.3 million just six months earlier.

The study states:

As of mid-2023 – the latest year for which detailed data is available – more than 11 million U.S. residents were born in Mexico, representing 22% of all immigrants nationally. The second-largest immigrant group was from India (3.2 million, or 6%), followed by China (3 million, or 6%), the Philippines (2.1 million, or 4%) and Cuba (1.7 million, or 3%).

About half of all U.S. immigrants (52%, or 26.7 million people) were born in Latin America. In addition to the millions of migrants from Mexico and Cuba, more than a million hail from El Salvador (1.6 million), Guatemala (1.4 million), the Dominican Republic (1.4 million), Colombia (1.2 million), Honduras (1.1 million) and Venezuela (1.1 million).

After Latin America, Asia is the second-largest region of birth for U.S. immigrants. In 2023, around a quarter of all immigrants (27%, or nearly 14 million people) were born in Asia.

As of 2023, there were about 11 million immigrants from every other world region combined, accounting for 22% of the U.S. foreign-born population: 10% were born in Europe, 5% in sub-Saharan Africa, 4% in the Middle East-North Africa region, and 2% in Canada or another North American country (a category that includes Bermuda and some smaller countries).

However, the analysis also found that the number of illegal aliens residing in the U.S. still remains around 14 million, underlining the enormous challenge the Trump administration faces in carrying out millions of mass deportations.

The U.S. unauthorized immigrant population reached a record 14 million in 2023 — after the largest increase in two years ever recorded. Here’s what’s behind the rise. pic.twitter.com/JQxg4honB4

— Pew Research Center (@pewresearch) August 21, 2025

Since coming to office in January, the Trump administration has taken numerous steps to curb both legal and illegal migration.

Among their efforts including  tightening asylum access at the southern border, imposing stricter visa rules for students and skilled workers, and deploying thousands of federal agents to detain and deport illegal immigrants.

It has also suspended the refugee program that once provided green cards and a path to citizenship, introduced more rigorous screening of visa applicants expected to shrink the inflow of foreign workers and students.

They have also terminated temporary protections for people from countries including Haiti and Venezuela, making many of those entrants eligible for deportation.

The post U.S. Immigrant Population Falls For First Time in Over 50 Years — Down by 1.5 Million People This Year appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

FBI agents are looking for classified documents at John Bolton’s home and office.

Bolton’s security clearance was previously stripped by President Trump.

War-Pig Bolton has been out making the rounds on the fake news trashing President Trump.

The DOJ is currently looking at James Comey, James Clapper, John Brennan and several others.

The FBI busted down his door during his home raid!

Via Karli Bonne and RedWave Press.

Ainsley Earhardt: “The New York Post is reporting [FBI agents] busted through [John Bolton’s] home in Bethesda, Maryland. In a raid normally do they have — how do they get in the house? Would they ring the doorbell first and Bolton comes to the door?”

David Spunt: “Correct,… pic.twitter.com/36oKSlbIXf

— RedWave Press (@RedWave_Press) August 22, 2025

Kash is giving Bolton the J-6 protester treatment!

FBI agents also raided Bolton’s office in Washington DC.

The post UPDATE: FBI Raids War-Pig John Bolton’s Home and Office – Agents Reportedly BUSTED THROUGH His Door During Friday Morning Raid! appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Sometimes the smallest details tell the biggest parts of a story.

One of the key reasons the parent company of CBS agreed to pay $16 million to settle a lawsuit brought by Donald Trump is buried dozens of paragraphs into a New York Times report about now-former Paramount non-executive chairwoman Shari Redstone and the company’s decision-making process.

And it turns out, it involves an apparent play to protect now-former President Joe Biden.

Trump had sued CBS in October over its editing of an interview on the “60 Minutes” program with then-Vice President Kamala Harris. He maintained that “60 Minutes” edited Harris’ answers to make her appear more coherent than she actually was.

Paramount settled the suit in early July with a $16 million donation to the Trump presidential library fund.

According to The New York Times, Redstone and her son, Tyler, feared the lawsuit would bring attention to another CBS interview — this one with President Joe Biden.

“Ms. Redstone said CBS personnel had told her that in October 2023, when Scott Pelley of ’60 Minutes’ interviewed President Joseph R. Biden Jr., the president had seemed drowsy and had to be prodded to answer. She and Tyler worried that CBS might be accused of editing the interview to conceal Mr. Biden’s failings.”

“This case was never as black-and-white as people assumed,” Redstone told the newspaper.

What’s interesting here is that in the “60 Minutes” report itself, correspondent Scott Pelley — a man who openly declared his liberal leanings at a May commencement speech at North Carolina’s Wake Forest University — acknowledged that Biden was “tired,” though he tried to put the best face on it.

From the show’s transcript: “As we spoke to the president, his secretary of state was in Israel, his secretary of defense was in a NATO meeting on Ukraine. America’s oldest president seemed tired from directing all of this. But he was very clear on what he stood for and how his policies, in his view, would see America through.”

If Pelley and “60 Minutes” felt the need to put in posterior-covering garbage like that, it’s truly hard to imagine how bad the actual footage the program left out really was.

The fact that Redstone was worried about raw footage being cherry-picked (the article’s word) by Trump’s lawyers is a pretty good sign that the then-sitting president of the United States — a man with a nuclear arsenal at his command — came across like he was drooling his way through an after-lunch nap.

Media analyst Mark Halperin, one of the sharpest voices of journalism criticism in the country (just ask former Washington Post “fact-checker” Glenn Kessler), picked up on the story on his “2Way Tonight” show on the 2WayTV media platform. While he was way too forgiving of CBS on the subject of the Kamala Harris interview, he hit the nail right on the head when it came to Biden.

A New York Times interview with Shari Redstone reveals one reason she wanted Paramount to settle Donald Trump’s lawsuit over how “60 Minutes” edited its October 2024 interview with Kamala Harris: the discovery process could expose the program’s editing of a 2023 Joe Biden… pic.twitter.com/7ySrXMEnUX

— 2WAY (@2waytvapp) August 21, 2025

“Halperin’s fifth rule of the media, or Washington, rather, is anything that’s famous for not being released will eventually have to be released,” Halperin said. “We all now want to see the outtakes of this Biden interview.”

The mention of the Biden interview is treated as a minor part of the overall report, which was written by New York Times business reporter James B. Stewart. But it’s clear that it played a major role in Redstone’s decision when it came to the Trump lawsuit.

Redstone’s comment in the report that the case was “never as black and white as people assumed” can fairly be read as an admission there were grounds for normal Americans to conclude that “60 Minutes” was indeed engaging in exactly the kind of “ongoing false, misleading, and deceptive acts” that Trump’s lawsuit claimed.

In the case of the Kamala Harris interview, CBS actually publicized two answers Harris gave to one question — one was in promotional material for the show, and the other was on the “60 Minutes” program proper. The one that made her sound better was used in the setting where she had the greatest visibility.

In the Biden interview, one of the most liberal broadcast journalists in America felt obligated to at least mention the then-president’s physical weariness, because it obviously couldn’t be hidden.

But what could be hidden was footage of just how bad Biden was, and to keep that footage under wraps, Redstone agreed to a settlement that was essentially a humiliation for “60 Minutes” and CBS News as a whole.

It’s a detail that was buried in the report from The New York Times — 46 paragraphs into an 86-paragraph article.

But sometimes it’s a small detail that tells a larger story.

In this case, it’s the larger story of the decline of the once-vaunted “60 Minutes” — and the propaganda press it’s a part of.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

The post Fears About Un-Aired Footage of ‘Drowsy’ Biden Led Paramount to Settle with Trump: Ex-Chairwoman appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.