The financial problems facing The Washington Post just keep on mounting.

Despite aggressive staff cuts and the backing of billionaire proprietor Jeff Bezos, the paper lost an additional $100 million in 2025, according to a report from The Wall Street Journal.

The company also posted losses exceeding $100 million last year, deepening a multiyear downturn that recently led to sweeping layoffs.

The paper also lost roughly $100 million in 2024 and $77 million in 2023, continuing a trend of mounting red ink.

Earlier this month, the company cut approximately 30 percent of its staff in an effort to reset operations and reduce costs.

Jeff Bezos Says Far-Left Washington Post Will Now Focus on ‘Personal Liberties and Free Markets’ — Opinion Editor Resigns in Response

A staggering statement from former Washington Post editor Marty Baron: "This ranks among the darkest days in the history of one of the world's greatest news organizations." pic.twitter.com/xWQrN8B1P4

— Ben Mullin (@BenMullin) February 4, 2026

I am part of the mass layoffs at the Washington Post.

I am sad and angry. We all want to keep doing the work.

But for now I want to document a reality of being in journalism today. pic.twitter.com/Xzrq6HhiP7

— Sam Fortier (@Sam4TR) February 4, 2026

At a staff meeting on Wednesday, acting CEO and publisher Jeff D’Onofrio and executive editor Matt Murray addressed employees for the first time since the layoffs.

D’Onofrio said the organization’s expenses outpaced revenue between 2022 and 2025, citing a rapid hiring surge in previous years.

According to remarks shared by attendees, the number of stories published has dropped 42 percent since 2020, while newsroom costs in 2025 were 16 percent higher than five years earlier.

Murray, who took over as executive editor in mid-2024, acknowledged the severity of the situation.

“We don’t want or need to do every story or jump on everything that happens,” Murray told staff.

“We’re not a paper of record; there’s no such thing anymore in today’s world.”

He added that the goal is to be “distinctive, urgent, must-read with every chance we have.”

D’Onofrio, appointed earlier this month following the departure of publisher and CEO Will Lewis, said leadership is working on a longer-term strategy to stabilize its precarious financial situation.

“Bear with me, because that will take some time and obvious care, but I’m keen to get going on it,” he told staff.

“And we are going to go after it, and we’re going to go after it hard, because we owe it to this place to do that.”

Bezos, meanwhile, has recently tried to move the paper away from its traditional left-wing activist journalism in the hope of currying favor with President Trump.

Last year, he announced that the paper’s entire opinion section would be dedicated to promoting “personal liberties and free markets.”

Jeff Bezos Says Far-Left Washington Post Will Now Focus on ‘Personal Liberties and Free Markets’ — Opinion Editor Resigns in Response

Whatever the Post’s future, few conservatives are mourning the decline of one of America’s most entrenched Democratic-aligned newsrooms.

The post The Washington Post Just Keeps Bleeding Money — Over $100 Million Lost in 2025 appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Casey Means, President Trump’s nominee for surgeon general, faced intense questioning before the Senate Health Committee over her views on vaccines, pesticides, business ties, and her alignment with Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Make America Healthy Again agenda.

She is largely against pesticides and chemicals in food, so I imagine the left will suddenly be all in on both. They will claim it is Republican misinformation to suggest that chemicals in food can be harmful.

Means, a Stanford-trained physician and health entrepreneur, found bipartisan support for her focus on chronic disease and reducing Americans’ reliance on ultra-processed foods.

Mainstream media claimed that she sidestepped vaccine questions because she said, “vaccines save lives” and are an “important part of the public health strategy,” but stopped short of encouraging mothers to have their children vaccinated against measles and flu. It is dishonest to say she sidestepped the question. She answered that vaccines save lives while arguing for informed consent and questioning whether every vaccine in the current schedule is necessary.

She did not explicitly state that vaccines do not cause autism and questioned whether certain vaccines, such as the hepatitis B shot, should be universally administered at birth. She has been particularly critical of giving the hepatitis B vaccine to all newborns on their first day of life, questioning its necessity in every case.

She advocates “shared clinical decision-making” between families and their doctors rather than automatic adherence to a blanket schedule. While acknowledging the “overwhelming body of evidence” refuting a link between vaccines and autism, she also told senators that “science is never settled” and supported further investigation into environmental factors. Several senators pressed her on whether flu and hepatitis B vaccines reduce hospitalizations and deaths, and she acknowledged population-level benefits.

Refusing to encourage mothers to give their children a flu shot, saying more research is needed to determine whether vaccines are linked to autism, supporting informed consent, and suggesting that certain vaccines should possibly be removed from the standard childhood schedule is not sidestepping. It expresses a different viewpoint, which the left hates.

Dr. Means is a vocal critic of the prevalence of chemicals in the environment, which she links to rising rates of chronic disease. Her primary focus is on what she calls a broken food system and the dangers of ultra-processed foods and chemical additives.

She blames the chronic disease epidemic largely on the marketing and widespread consumption of ultra-processed foods, which she argues are structured against human health. She supports the Make America Healthy Again agenda to scrutinize and potentially remove food dyes and additives that are banned in other countries but still allowed in the United States.

Her philosophy centers on metabolic health, arguing that the medical establishment focuses too much on pushing pills rather than addressing how the American diet contributes to cellular dysfunction.

Lawmakers scrutinized her past criticism of pesticides. She has labeled many common pesticides toxic and suggested that reducing exposure could significantly improve health. During her hearing, she acknowledged that American farmers are in an impossible situation because the current food system depends on these chemicals to maintain affordability and scale.

She advocates a long-term transition to more sustainable farming practices that reduce reliance on toxic chemicals, recognizing that such changes would need to be gradual to avoid destabilizing agriculture.

Democrats questioned her financial ties to wellness companies, noting she earned significant income from partnerships with supplement and diagnostic testing brands. Some senators suggested she may have failed to properly disclose sponsored content. Means denied intentional wrongdoing and said she would correct any inadvertent disclosure issues.

Her medical background also drew attention. Though trained as a physician, she left her residency more than seven years ago and placed her Oregon medical license on inactive status, meaning she currently cannot practice medicine there.

Throughout the hearing, Means framed her mission as leading a national effort to combat chronic disease and promote healthier living. The exchange highlighted tensions over vaccines, federal health policy, and Kennedy’s reshaping of public health leadership under President Trump’s second term. As a close ally of Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and a leader in the Make America Healthy Again movement, Dr. Means emphasizes root-cause medicine over pharmaceutical interventions.

It is ironic that the left and their media allies are framing Dr. Means’s alignment with Secretary of Health Kennedy as a disadvantage rather than recognizing that having two leaders aligned and working toward similar goals will be more effective in bringing about positive change for the United States.

The post Surgeon General Nominee Aligns With Secretary Kennedy on Vaccines and Pesticides appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

WATCH: Trump’s State of the Union BROKE the Democrat Party

The latest episode of The Patriot Perspective examined why President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address was not merely long or energetic, but strategically effective. At more than 107 minutes, it became the longest State of the Union in American history. Length alone does not determine impact. Structure does.

The episode’s central argument was straightforward: the speech was engineered to create contrast, and Democrats reinforced it through their visible reactions.

Trump framed the address around affordability, border enforcement, public safety, and national confidence. He cited tariff revenue, increased energy production, declining prices on key consumer goods, and job growth.

Whether one supports every mechanism is secondary to the message’s coherence. The administration is positioning affordability as the defining issue heading into the midterms and presenting measurable indicators to support that claim.

Yet the most politically consequential moments were not economic charts. When Trump asked members of Congress to stand if they opposed illegal immigration and supported prioritizing American citizens, the chamber divided itself.

Republicans rose. Most Democrats remained seated. That image reduced a policy debate to a visible alignment: citizen-first enforcement versus continued resistance to stricter border policy.

Democrat leadership frequently describes the party as pragmatic and centrist, particularly in competitive districts.

Yet in a nationally televised address, members declined to stand for a proposition framed around border enforcement and public safety. Voters evaluate that contrast without assistance.

The same pattern emerged throughout the evening. Families of crime victims were recognized—a Coast Guard officer credited with saving more than 100 lives received acknowledgment.

Individuals representing service and sacrifice were seated in the gallery as embodiments of policy consequences. In multiple instances, applause from the Democrat side was limited or absent.

Symbolic behavior in these moments carries weight. Civic acknowledgment does not require policy agreement.

Standing for a grieving parent or a decorated service member is not an endorsement of an entire legislative agenda. Rather, it is a baseline expression of respect.

When that response is withheld, the absence becomes politically significant.

The episode also addressed the opposition’s demeanor.

Visible disengagement, scattered interruptions, and performative protest elements reinforced an image of internal fragmentation rather than disciplined counterargument.

For a party attempting to project stability heading into midterms, appearance matters.

The broader strategic takeaway was clear. Trump structured the address around people rather than politics.

Each policy category was paired with a face, a family, or a story. That design constrained the opposition. Democrat members of Congress refused to participate in those moments or declined to do so in full view of the electorate.

Political persuasion often depends less on rhetorical flourish than on structured contrast.

This State of the Union repeatedly created that contrast. 

The episode concluded that the speech succeeded not only because of what the president argued, but because Democrat reactions validated the narrative that they are further from the political center than they claim.

In a midterm cycle defined by affordability and public safety, that perception could prove decisive.

The Patriot Perspective has recently switched its main platform from Rumble to YouTube, and we would greatly appreciate it if our old subscribers would subscribe to us there. [HERE]

The post Trump’s State of the Union BROKE the Democrat Party (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

During a recent interview with Jen Psaki of MSNOW, California Governor Gavin Newsom was asked about the 2028 election and said that Vice President J.D. Vance scares him more than President Trump.

This is as predictable as the rising sun.

For Democrats, the current Republican is always worse than the last one. Once a Republican is out of power and no longer represents a threat to their election prospects, they are suddenly the ‘reasonable’ Republican. It happens again and again.

Just look at all the people on the left who are suddenly OK with George W. Bush and Mitt Romney. They were both ‘worse than Hitler’ when they presented a threat to Democrats. This is no different.

The Hill reports:

Newsom: Vance ‘scares me … almost more than Trump’

California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) shared his trepidation about Vice President Vance in a recent interview with MS NOW, describing him as “dangerous.”

“Vance, for whatever reason, scares me, almost more than Trump,” the Democratic governor told host Jen Psaki. “I mean, talk about a guy who put a mask on and his face grew into it.”

Newsom called Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio “frauds” and “phonies” for reversing their previous criticisms of the president.

“But JD is a unique fraud and phony, and he’s a little more dangerous,” Newsom said.

Newsom, who is widely seen as a top potential Democratic contender in the 2028 presidential race, has staunchly opposed the Trump administration’s policies.

In the MS NOW interview, which was recorded a day after Trump’s State of the Union address, the governor expressed particular concerns about the possibility of Trump seeking a third term in office and issued a “code red” about the state of election security in America.

Here’s the video:

Marco Rubio is a complete fraud. But no one tops JD Vance. Talk about a guy who put a mask on his face and grew into it. Pathetic. pic.twitter.com/fNbTEYJY4z

— Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) February 26, 2026

This is all about the 2028 election, of course. In case you somehow haven’t noticed, Gavin Newsom is everywhere right now, doing interviews, holding public meetings with various people and groups.

He is trying to embed himself in the minds of voters, especially Democrat voters, to see him as an inevitability.

The truth is that he is a total snake who has done massive harm to the state of California. Given his performance on rebuilding after the wildfires from last year, it’s a miracle that he still has a job.

The post SO PREDICTABLE: Gavin Newsom Says J.D. Vance Scares Him More Than Trump (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

During a recent segment on CNN, Scott Jennings – the lone conservative voice on the entire network – suggested that for Democrats, the Epstein Files are the new Steele Dossier.

This is exactly right. You could also say that the Epstein Files are the new Russia Collusion.

It’s nothing more than the new thing for the left to obsess about and spread dirty disinformation about, in their latest effort to ‘get’ Trump.

They have nothing new. They just keep going after whatever shiny object is in front of them at the time.

The Daily Caller has details:

Speaking during a panel discussion on “The Arena,” Jennings said the Epstein records should be released in accordance with the law Congress passed. He warned against what he called a coordinated effort to smear President Donald Trump by selectively citing names that appear in the documents.

“You have Democrat after Democrat after Democrat, even Hillary Clinton just a little while ago, all too happy to go on television and cast aspersions on his [Trump’s] character, using this idea that while his name appears in the files, they’re trying to mislead the American people,” Jennings said. “It’s the Steele dossier all over again. That’s all this is. Let’s throw out something and hope it sticks, even though there’s no evidence whatsoever.”

“If the files can be released, and they should be released according to the law that Congress passed, they should do that. Now, I know they have a process for going through these documents, and it’s weeding out things that are duplicative or not germane. And, as was explained yesterday, here, there are files all over the country, apparently, and they’re still collecting them. So I get the process may be a little more onerous than perhaps many people know regarding Trump,” Jennings said.

Jennings goes on to point out that Trump was even an Epstein whistleblower, a fact that Democrats love to overlook.

Watch the video below:

BREAKING: Scott Jennings PUMMELS Democrat lies after the Epstein Files backfired on them, their smears are FAILING

“It’s the Steele Dossier ALL OVER again! Let’s THROW things and hope it STICKS, with NO EVIDENCE!”

“What we know is TRUE is that Trump called the police and… pic.twitter.com/yR9LidmdFr

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) February 26, 2026

If the Epstein Files and everything associated with them suddenly disappeared and no one had ever heard of them, Democrats would be trying to use something else to the same ends. They still have not gotten over losing to Trump and they never will.

The post NAILED IT: Scott Jennings Says for Democrats, the Epstein Files Are the New Steele Dossier (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.