President Trump is currently on an official trip to England with First Lady Melania Trump. On Wednesday morning, the uber-popular US President departed Winfield House for Windsor Castle.

President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump will participate in a wreath-laying ceremony later this morning at the tomb of Queen Elizabeth,  a friend of the 47th president.

President Trump and Melania Trump will then attend a state banquet later this evening.

Obviously, the President has a very full day ahead of him.

But that didn’t stop President Trump from gloating after corrupt Fulton County DA Fani Willis suffered a major setback in court.

President Trump responded on Tuesday to Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’ failed attempt to reinstate herself to prosecute her lawfare case against President Trump and 2020 GOP Presidential electors in Georgia.

The President spoke to reporters at the White House as he departed for London, where he will meet with the King and Queen and UK officials at the Windsor Castle.

Trump said the Georgia Supreme Court made a “great decision.”

“The court just ruled that she is a disaster,” he said.

Trump further noted that Willis paid a massive sum of money to her lover and lead prosecutor on the case, Nathan Wade, “for his expertise, but he never did it before.” Willis gave Wade well over half a million dollars over three years while other prosecutors on the case billed less than $100,000.

“Now, she should be prosecuted,” Trump added.

“What Fani Willis did to innocent people, patriots that love our country, what she did to them by indicting them and destroying them, she should be put in jail. She’s a criminal.”

President Trump then later posted this hilarious video of the two lustful lovebirds to rub salt in her wounds.

This is why we love this man…

The post President Trump Takes Break During England Trip to Post Epic Meme on Horned-Up Lovebirds Fani Willis and Nathan Wade after Fani’s Big Loss in Court appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The Left can’t stop twisting the truth.

First, they tried to smear Conservatives by insisting the man who assassinated Charlie Kirk was one of us. That narrative collapsed under the weight of the evidence.

Utah authorities released the full exchange between shooter Tyler Robinson and his transgender partner, Lance Twiggs. The texts are graphic, chilling, and deeply incriminating, filled with details about the planning, the weapon, and the motive.

Yet instead of focusing on the clear evidence of left-wing radicalization, the media would rather gush over Robinson calling Twiggs “my love.”

Now, as Scott Jennings pointed out on X, the new spin is just as absurd:

“First, the left tried to convince us the man who killed Charlie Kirk was a conservative. That failed. Now, we’re seeing multiple attempts to frame this as some transgender love story. ENOUGH. It’s time to accept the glaring truth that is staring you right in the face.

During an interview, actor Montel Williams outrageously downplayed the assassin’s political motives, spinning it into some kind of tragic romance.

Williams: “We’re talking about a love-torn child, a kid. This is probably his first real relationship, and somebody was disparaging the person that he loved. He sat on that building for 30 minutes before he took the shot. Why did he wait until the first word trans came up? Then he took the shot… I don’t believe he was motivated politically. I think this was motivated emotionally.”

Scott Jennings wasn’t having any of it. He came prepared with the facts.

Jennings: “The evidence here is overwhelming. He said, ‘Charlie Kirk, I can’t stand this hate anymore. I’m going to take him out.’ The testimony from him and the statements of his family, he had become more left wing. He etched the statements that are made by the left about Republicans and Conservatives — calling Charlie Kirk a fascist — on the bullet cases.”

When Williams tried to claim the killer was joking in his last text, Jennings shut him down immediately:

Jennings: “It doesn’t sound like a joke to me because someone’s dead and about to be buried. It doesn’t sound like a joke to me. I’m just telling you, there was an effort all weekend long on the left to try to make this guy sound like he was a conservative. That failed. The evidence has now come out. He was motivated by hate. He was motivated by left-wing radicalism.

He got mixed up with some trans ideology in his life. We’ll learn more about that, I’m sure, when more evidence and testimony comes out. We are looking around the edges of this for something other than what is staring us in the face. Left-wing radicalism got this kid. He went up to a roof and he murdered our friend, and that’s what happened.”

The post Scott Jennings DISMANTLES Left’s Latest Spin — Shreds “Trans Love Story” Narrative Behind Charlie Kirk’s Assassination appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Attorney General Pam Bondi is scrambling to clarify her comments after a firestorm erupted over her suggestion that the Department of Justice would target so-called “hate speech.”

The controversy follows an outrageous incident at an Office Depot in Michigan, where three teenage boys were denied service after pre-paying for posters meant for a Charlie Kirk memorial vigil.

The smug employees—one identifying as a supervisor, another as a “manager”—flatly refused to print the order, dismissing the vigil posters as “propaganda.”

Office Depot corporate quickly issued an apology, announced an internal review, and confirmed the employee had been terminated.

But rather than directly addressing the broader climate of hate fueling these incidents, Bondi used her Fox interview to focus on discrimination claims against Office Depot:

“Employers, you have an obligation to get rid of people. You need to look at people who are saying horrible things, and they shouldn’t be working with you. Businesses cannot discriminate. If you want to go in and print posters with Charlie’s pictures on them for a vigil, you have to let them do that. We can prosecute you for that. I have Harmeet Dhillon right now in our civil rights unit looking at that immediately. That Office Depot had done that—we’re looking at it.”

Conservative commentator Matt Walsh wasted no time unloading on Bondi for what he called a “gratuitous and pointless” use of DOJ resources:

“Get rid of her. Today. This is insane. Conservatives have fought for decades for the right to refuse service to anyone. We won that fight. Now Pam Bondi wants to roll it all back for no reason. This stuff is being handled successfully through free speech and free markets. We need the AG focused on bringing down the left wing terror cells, not prosecuting Office Depot for God’s sake.”

According to Pam Bondi:

“Hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence is NOT protected by the First Amendment. It’s a crime. For far too long, we’ve watched the radical left normalize threats, call for assassinations, and cheer on political violence. That era is over.

Under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c), it is a federal crime to transmit “any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another.” Likewise, 18 U.S.C. § 876 and 18 U.S.C. § 115 make it a felony to threaten public officials, members of Congress, or their families.

You cannot call for someone’s murder. You cannot swat a Member of Congress. You cannot dox a conservative family and think it will be brushed off as “free speech.” These acts are punishable crimes, and every single threat will be met with the full force of the law.

Free speech protects ideas, debate, even dissent but it does NOT and will NEVER protect violence.

It is clear this violent rhetoric is designed to silence others from voicing conservative ideals.

We will never be silenced. Not for our families, not for our freedoms, and never for Charlie. His legacy will not be erased by fear or intimidation.”

Hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence is NOT protected by the First Amendment. It’s a crime. For far too long, we’ve watched the radical left normalize threats, call for assassinations, and cheer on political violence. That era is over.

Under 18 U.S.C. §…

— Attorney General Pamela Bondi (@AGPamBondi) September 16, 2025

Bondi clarified her remarks in a statement to Axios.

“Freedom of speech is sacred in our country, and we will never impede upon that right. My intention was to speak about threats of violence that individuals incite against others.”

She emphasized that while hateful speech itself is constitutionally protected, calls for violence, swatting attempts, doxxing, and assassination threats are federal crimes under statutes like 18 U.S.C. §§ 875, 876, and 115.

“You cannot call for someone’s murder. You cannot swat a Member of Congress. You cannot dox a conservative family and think it will be brushed off as ‘free speech.’ These acts are punishable crimes, and every single threat will be met with the full force of the law.”

Her office also confirmed that the DOJ Civil Rights Division is not moving forward with prosecuting Office Depot.

Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon said that, “we are not prosecuting people for nasty speech alone — but true incitement to violence, or hate-motivated attacks, are illegal and will be treated as such by this DOJ!”

We are not prosecuting people for nasty speech alone — but true incitement to violence, or hate-motivated attacks, are illegal and will be treated as such by this DOJ! https://t.co/ipsvuUvFTa https://t.co/ipsvuUvFTa

— AAGHarmeetDhillon (@AAGDhillon) September 16, 2025

The post AG Pam Bondi Clarifies Her Stance on First Amendment Following Backlash — Says Her Office Won’t Prosecute “Hate Speech” appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

New York State Attorney General Letitia James, long claiming to be a public champion of tenants’ rights, has herself been in violation of New York City’s rent stabilization laws for more than two decades.

Since purchasing a four-story apartment building at 296 Lafayette Avenue in Brooklyn in 2001, James has failed to register the property with the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) as required for rent-stabilized buildings.

By failing to register, she denied her tenants the protections of rent stabilization, while collecting rents above the legally regulated amounts for 24 years.

New York City’s housing code is based on its “Rent Stabilization Law of 1969,” which was designed to shield tenants from large rent raises, unlawful deregulation, and eviction abuses.

It sets yearly allowable rent increases, typically at around 3% per year. The law applies to qualifying buildings and requires landlords to register with DHCR and file annual reports on tenants, rents, and lease terms.

The NYC Department of Buildings (DOB) issues Certificates of Occupancy to establish the legal number of units in properties. That designation is the one and only controlling legal authority for unit count. The three most recent Certificates of Occupancy for Letitia James’s building at 296 Lafayette Avenue are:

1961: Authorized as seven (7) family units, with the building officially designated as a “Class A Multiple Dwelling.”

1981: Two decades later, the legal unit count was reduced to four (4) apartments, reflecting an authorized combining of units.

2001: This Certificate of Occupancy updated the building to a FIVE (5) FAMILY DWELLING, which remains its designation today.

The Rent Stabilization Law of 1969 said that any building constructed before January 1, 1974, with six or more apartments, is subject to “Rent Stabilization” laws.

The critical point for Letitia James is that, according to the 1961 Certificate of Occupancy, the last one before the passage of the Rent Stabilization Law in 1969, her building at 296 Lafayette Avenue had seven (7) units. This meant that when the law took effect in 1969, James’s building was permanently entered into rent stabilization program.

Once a building is subject to rent stabilization, that status “runs with the building” forever. Later reductions down to four units, or back up to five units, can never legally strip the building of its original rent stabilization regulatory status.

Courts and DHCR have repeatedly emphasized that a landlord cannot deregulate a property from rent stabilization by simply reducing the number of units through alterations or new Certificates of Occupancy.

In Gersten v. 56 7th Ave. LLC (2005), New York’s highest court held that rent stabilization coverage cannot be destroyed by unilateral landlord action.

Despite her registration requirements, public records show that Letitia James has never registered 296 Lafayette Avenue with DHCR since her purchase in 2001. Nor has she filed the required annual tenant registrations for any of her building’s apartments.

The consequences of James’s failure to register are significant. Under RSC § 2528.4, a landlord who fails to register may not lawfully collect any rent increases. Having never registered since 2001, any rent increases by James since 2001 were unlawful.

In fact, if James charged tenants above the last legal rent increase in 2001, they can file overcharge complaints. DHCR and the courts may impose a refund of overcharges plus 9% annual interest, plus treble damages.

Given that her apartment building has been unregistered for nearly a quarter century, the potential overcharge and penalty exposure for Letitia James is massive.

Ironically, Letitia James has consistently positioned herself as a defender of rent stabilization laws and tenants’ rights in New York City.

She has argued that rent stabilization is a vital safeguard for working families, especially during periods of economic stress such as the COVID-19 crisis, and that her office would “do everything it can to defend New York’s rent laws and protect struggling tenants.”

James has even pursued direct legal action against landlords who violated rent stabilization protections. In August 2025, she sued Zara Realty for overcharging tenants in Queens, accusing the company of exploiting subsidy recipients, ignoring rent reduction orders, and pursuing unlawful evictions.

I have recently chronicled in The Gateway Pundit Letitia James’s fraudulent real estate and mortgage filings in which she obtained mortgages by misrepresenting her unit count.

Now, Letitia James’s failure to register with DHCR since 2001 undermines the integrity of New York City’s rent regulation as a whole.

Tenants lose the protections they are entitled to, including regulated leases, lawful rent raise limits, and the ability to challenge illegal increases. Meanwhile, the city loses accurate data on housing stock, frustrating policymakers’ ability to assess affordability.

Above all, the issue is about fairness and accountability. There is no higher standard for a person who holds the office of state Attorney General than upholding the rule of law, not just in words, but in deed.

New Yorkers can no longer stand for an Attorney General who abuses both the law and her constituents for personal financial gain.

For the integrity of her public office, Letitia James should resign her position as Attorney General, register her apartment building with DHCR, and make financial restitution to the many tenants whom she has badly mistreated for the past 24 years.

Joel Gilbert is a Los Angeles-based film producer and president of Highway 61 Entertainment. He is the producer of the new film Roseanne Barr Is America. He is also the producer of: Dreams from My Real Father, The Trayvon Hoax, Trump: The Art of the Insult, and many other films on American politics and music icons. Gilbert is on Twitter: @JoelSGilbert.

The post “Above the Law” Landlord: Letitia James Caught Violating New York’s Rent Stabilization Laws appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

This article originally appeared on vigilantfox.com and was republished with permission.

Tucker Carlson aired a two-hour broadcast Tuesday evening reminiscent of his Fox News days, speaking with force and reflecting deeply on the death of his friend Charlie Kirk.

Carlson’s opening monologue was filled with controversy, but it was also filled with several powerful moments. One of those moments came right at the start when Carlson revealed Charlie Kirk’s greatest “sin,” the one that led to his death.

“Sin” is in quotes because Carlson wasn’t talking about sin in the traditional sense, but about the kind of “sin” that makes you hated among your fellow man and a target.

That “sin,” Carlson said, was Kirk’s profound love for God and Jesus Christ. He never hid his faith, and it guided everything he did. But as Carlson explained, even though Christianity is a peaceful religion, it paradoxically enrages many.

By making Christianity the center of his life, Kirk became the ultimate enemy.

Watch as Carlson speaks deeply on the subject. This is two minutes of Tucker at his absolute best:

“Charlie was not a Nazi. He was not killed because he was a Nazi. Yes, he was a defender of Israel. He didn’t die for Israel. However, why did he die? What was his life about? What was the sin, the core sin that Charlie Kirk committed against somebody, power that got him killed in the end?

“And, the answer is right in front of us, certainly those of us who knew him. Charlie’s life was defined by his Christian faith, not his spirituality, but his belief in Jesus, his life as a Christian. Everything in his life flowed from those beliefs. Everything.

“Everything he did, said and believed came from the fact that he was above all, a Christian. And that is and was and in fact has always been deeply provocative and offensive to the rest of the world.

“And why is that? It’s worth thinking about it for just a second. Christianity doesn’t seem like the kind of religion that provoke people to anger and violence. In fact, it seems just the opposite. It’s the world’s most profoundly nonviolent religion. Maybe the world’s only truly nonviolent religion, a religion based on a man who Christians believe was also God, who, as he was being led away to be tortured to death on made up charges, scolded one of his disciples for fighting back.

“This is a religion committed to love above all and to living in peace and harmony. Truly, it’s a universalist religion that believes that every person has a shot at heaven. It’s not exclusionary at all. And so you would think it would make sense that if you’re a government or if you’re in power, that you’d want a lot of Christians living in your country because they’re not going to cause massive problems.

“Not a lot of sincere Christians are fomenting insurrection at any given moment. Pretty much none. Most of the time they’re tidy. They get married, they love their children, they pay their taxes. They’re commanded to pay their taxes. So why wouldn’t you want a nation full of Christians?

“Why wouldn’t you encourage this religious belief, even if it wasn’t yours? Why would you hate it? Well, there are a couple of reasons. There are a couple of things about Christianity, and these were evident throughout Charlie’s public life, that are deeply provocative to the people in power.

“And the first is the insistence that Christianity comes with inherently that you are not God, you are not God and neither are your leaders. God is God and all of us stand before him in the end to be judged and all of us will be found lacking.

“Christians believe the only way to heaven is through Jesus. That’s the only way. But all of us, whether we believe in Jesus or not, are fallen. We are sinners, we are less than we ought to be. We are not gods, and neither are the people who lead us.”

Carlson’s remarks echo what criminologist Scott Bonn said on CNN Monday night.

Bonn, phD, who makes a living analyzing the psychology of killers, made the case on Laura Coates Live that the Charlie Kirk shooting suspect’s hate for Christians was the driving motive behind the murder.

“I believe that he is proud of what he did,” Bonn stressed.

“I think Charlie Kirk represented something both personal to him as well as symbolic. He was striking out at things that he had grown to hate and resent—and I’m talking about Christian conservatism and gun ownership.”

“I think he [Tyler Robinson] was actually taking recognition, saying, ‘Yes, I did this,’ and at some level, taking some pride in it.”

Watch the full broadcast below:

NOTE: In the wake of Charlie Kirk’s tragic death, VigilantFox.com is fully committed to covering this story from every angle.

We believe this is a pivotal moment that will shape the future of younger generations and define the left vs. right divide for years to come.

We will not let up in covering this story and giving it the full attention it deserves. Thank you for your support.

The post Tucker Carlson Reveals the “Sin” That Cost Charlie Kirk His Life appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.