Home Blog Page 14

New Sanctions Target Cartel-Linked Gambling Scheme in Mexico

Mexican
Mexican flag (Jorge Aguilar/Unsplash)

The Department of the Treasury announced that its Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) imposed sanctions on 27 entities linked to criminal networks.

The move, made in partnership with the Mexican government, targets the Hysa Organized Crime Group and numerous Mexico-based gambling establishments involved in cartel-related money laundering schemes.

“The United States and Mexico are working together to combat money laundering in Mexico’s gambling sector. Our message to those supporting the cartels is clear: You will be held accountable,” said Treasury Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence John K. Hurley. “We thank the Government of Mexico for its strong partnership in this effort.”

According to the Treasury Department, the Hysa Organized Crime Group(HOCG), which includes family members Luftar Hysa (Luftar), Arben Hysa (Arben), Ramiz Hysa (Ramiz), Fatos Hysa (Fatos), and Fabjon Hysa (Fabjon) has extensive influence in Mexico-based businesses to launder the proceeds of narcotics trafficking. The HOCG is believed to “operate with the consent of the Sinaloa Cartel, which maintains criminal control over much of the territory where the group conducts its activities,” the press statement explained.

Last month, the OFAS sanctioned Mexican individuals and companies connected to the Sinaloa Cartel. The sanctioned entities supplied illicit fentanyl precursor chemicals to the cartel’s Los Chapitos faction.

The Treasury Department said at the time that the Los Chapitos have “consistently procured precursor chemicals, overseen illicit laboratories, and managed drug distribution.” The effort aligned with the State Department designating the Sinaloa Cartel as a Foreign Terrorist Organization and as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist.

Thousands of Deceased Americans on SNAP

(Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

Department of Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins revealed that thousands of deceased individuals have been receiving benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Nearly half a million people have also been receiving double the amount of benefits under the same name.

Speaking to Fox News’s Laura Ingraham, Rollins said that of the 29 states complying with SNAP data sharing, the USDA discovered “staggering” statistics. “Half a million people getting benefits two times under the same name. Five thousand dead people, 80% of the able-bodied Americans, meaning they can work, they don’t have small children at home, they’re not taking care of an elderly parent,” Rollins stated.

“They can work, and they choose not to work, of course, because they’re getting significant benefits from the taxpayer,” she asserted.

“Enough is enough,” Rollins wrote on X, sharing a clip from the interview. “SNAP fraud is out of control and hardworking Americans are footing the bill. In the states that shared their data, there were well over half a million cases of fraud — and that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Why are other states suing us for asking for the data? What are they hiding? Taxpayers deserve honesty. They deserve accountability. And it’s time for a historic crackdown to finally protect your money and not reward fraud!”

Rollins previously uncovered widespread fraud and abuse, revealing the results of a multi-state audit, showing electronic benefit transfer (EBT) cards holding balances exceeding $10,000, accounts tied to nonexistent individuals, and recipients receiving benefits from multiple states simultaneously.

Former Newsom Official Faces Fraud Charges

Newsom
California Governor Gavin Newsom (AP Photo/Eric Thayer, File)

Governor Gavin Newsom’s (D-CA) former chief of staff Dana Williamson has been arrested and charged with “conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud, bank fraud, wire fraud, conspiracy to defraud the United States and obstruct justice, subscribing to false tax returns, and making false statements,” U.S. Attorney Eric Grant announced.

Between February 2022 and September 2024, Williamson conspired with others to redirect about $225,000 in funds from a non-active political campaign to an associate’s personal use. The funds were funneled through business entities and disguised as pay for a “no-show job.”

Williamson also “subscribed to false tax returns claiming more than $1 million in business deductions for what were actually personal and nondeductible expenditures, such as private jet travel, luxury hotel stays, home furnishings, and designer handbags, as well as deductions for no-show jobs for friends and family,” the press statement explains.

A co-conspirator in the case, Sean McCluckie, is the former chief of staff to former U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, who previously served as California attorney general.

“The news today of formal accusations of impropriety by a long-serving trusted advisor are a gut punch,” Becerra said in a statement, adding, “As California’s former Attorney General, I fully comprehend the importance of allowing this investigation and legal process to run its course through our justice system.”

Grant called the development a “crucial step in an ongoing political corruption investigation that began more than three years ago.”

“As it always has, the U.S. Attorney’s Office will continue to work tirelessly with our law enforcement partners to protect the people of California from political corruption,” said Grant.

Trump Details Next Renovation Project

(Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

President Trump detailed what may be his next renovation project during an interview with Fox News’s Laura Ingraham.

Discussing the Eisenhower Executive Office Building (EEOB), Trump said, “When that building was built, people considered it to be a really ugly building, and I looked at it – and some other people [looked at it] – and it’s one of the most beautiful buildings ever built.”

The president intends to refresh the paint in the building, explaining it would bring out its “detail” and “highlight” its features.

“It’s all painting. Most of it’s painting. It’s cleaning, pointing, and painting. It needs other work too,” Trump said.

The EEOB was originally built for the State, War, and Navy Departments between 1871 and 1888, the General Services Administration’s website explains. “The Navy outgrew its space and left in 1918. The War Department outgrew its space and left in 1938. The State Department followed in 1947,” the page details. “In 1949 the building became the Executive Office Building to better identify its occupants, the Bureau of the Budget and White House staff.”

Last month, President Trump announced that the Lincoln Bathroom had been renovated.

“I renovated the Lincoln Bathroom in the White House. It was renovated in the 1940s in an art deco green tile style, which was totally inappropriate for the Lincoln Era,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “I did it in black and white polished Statuary marble. This was very appropriate for the time of Abraham Lincoln and, in fact, could be the marble that was originally there!”

A ballroom project is also underway at the White House.

America Onchain: Shutdown Over, Stimulus Pending

Bitcoin reserve
(Photo by Chris McGrath/Getty Images)

So what do we have right now? A government that's reopened until January 30. A stimulus proposal that might happen. And a market that's stuck in consolidation, waiting for the next real catalyst. . .

This content is only available for American Faith Premium Subscribers. For as low as $3.99/mo, you can access all our Premium content, learn more here.

If you are already a Premium subscriber, please log in to view this content.

 
 
 
 
 
 

China Seals Strategic Deal with Venezuela While U.S. Pressure Mounts

China
Chinese President Xi Jinping (Sergei Bobylev, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP, File)

China has moved decisively into Venezuela, providing the Maduro regime with a significant lifeline amid rising tensions with the United States. A recently announced trade and credit package signals Beijing’s intent to deepen its influence in Latin America even as Washington increases military and economic pressure on Caracas.

Under the agreement, China will extend a multi‑billion‑dollar credit line to Venezuela, repayable via oil shipments, while also concluding a “zero‑tariff” trade deal covering about 400 categories of goods between the two nations. Analysts say this combination of financial aid and trade relief shows China is not only protecting an ideological client, but installing long‑term commercial and strategic footholds.

This development arrives as the U.S. has deployed a carrier strike group and other naval assets to the Caribbean region to counter narcotrafficking routes linked to Caracas. The presence of the USS Gerald R. Ford and associated forces underscores Washington’s concerns over the Venezuelan regime’s ties to drug networks and regional instability. From China’s perspective, the move into Venezuela opens a strategic corridor into the hemisphere just as U.S. influence faces escalation.

Experts warn the arrangement could further weaken Venezuela’s economic sovereignty. One commentator described the deal as “China taking over the Venezuelan economy,” noting that Venezuela’s manufacturing sector is largely absent and domestic industry is unlikely to revive. The concern is that Venezuela ends up trading one dependency (oil wealth) for another (Chinese control). Institutions such as the Council on Foreign Relations say China has already extended over $60 billion in loans to Venezuela across the last two decades, often repaid in oil shipments, cementing a pattern of influence.

From a U.S. policy standpoint, the development raises red flags for national security and hemispheric competition. Should China gain deeper control over Venezuelan energy infrastructure, satellite surveillance installations, or maritime access, it could challenge U.S. strategic interests in the region. The Maduro regime, for its part, sees the Chinese backing as protection from U.S. pressure and potential intervention.

The story remains dynamic. A U.S. administration grounded in “America First” principles may view China’s maneuver as a direct challenge. Meanwhile, the Venezuelan population—already suffering from long‑term economic collapse, mass displacement and human rights abuses—faces further uncertainty as their country becomes a chessboard for great‑power rivalry.

Trump Signs Bill Ending Longest Government Shutdown in U.S. History

(Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

President Trump signed a funding bill on November 12, 2025, officially ending the longest government shutdown in U.S. history. The 43-day standoff, which began on October 1, shuttered large portions of the federal government and furloughed hundreds of thousands of workers. With this agreement, funding is restored through January 30, 2026, offering only a temporary resolution as deeper policy disputes remain unresolved.

The shutdown stemmed from a budget impasse between congressional Democrats and Republicans over healthcare spending and entitlement reforms. Democrats demanded continued federal subsidies for expanded Affordable Care Act (ACA) coverage, while Republicans, backed by the Trump administration, rejected further short-term extensions and called for structural reforms to reduce long-term costs.

The legislation passed the House by a narrow margin of 222-209, with six Democrats voting in favor. In the Senate, the bill cleared with a 60-40 vote. The package includes full-year funding for the Department of Agriculture, military construction projects, and legislative branch operations. It also reverses thousands of furlough notices issued during the shutdown and guarantees back pay for affected federal employees.

While the measure brings short-term relief, it notably omits any continuation of the expanded ACA subsidies. Instead, it includes a provision promising a vote on that issue in January, with no assurance of passage. Critics of the deal argue that it kicks the can down the road and sets up another round of brinkmanship early next year.

President Trump praised the legislation as a necessary step to reopen government while holding the line against what he described as unsustainable spending increases. Supporters framed the shutdown as a needed confrontation over runaway entitlement costs and long-term fiscal responsibility.

This shutdown surpassed the previous record of 35 days in 2018-2019, also during the Trump administration. With a short-term fix now in place, congressional leaders face renewed pressure to reach a broader agreement before the January deadline or risk another costly interruption to federal operations.

Sharon Osbourne Gets Emotional Over President Trump’s Voicemail After Ozzy’s Death

Ozzy Osbourne
Heavy metal singer Ozzy Osbourne performs circa 1988. (Photo by Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images)

Sharon Osbourne became visibly emotional when she shared a condolence voicemail left by Donald Trump after the death of her husband, rock icon Ozzy Osbourne. Speaking on the family podcast, she described the message as a gesture that “he didn’t have to call” but one she deeply appreciated.

In the voicemail, President Trump told Sharon: “Hi Sharon, it’s Donald Trump and I just wanted to wish you the best and the family… Ozzy was amazing, he was an amazing guy. I met him a few times and I want to tell you he was unique in every way and talented. … I just wanted to wish you the best… Take care of yourself. Say hello to the family. Thanks, bye.”

Sharon said the call stood out because of its sincerity, noting she had only worked with Trump briefly (on Celebrity Apprentice in 2010) and had never expected such a personal contact. She emphasized that the call was “really kind of him.”

The Osbourne family also received a handwritten letter of condolence from King Charles III, which Sharon described as deeply meaningful. She praised the king for his compassion and noted the recognition from global figures made the family feel supported during a difficult time.

Ozzy Osbourne died on July 22, 2025 at age 76. His cause of death was listed as cardiac arrest, acute myocardial infarction, coronary artery disease and Parkinson’s disease.

For Sharon, the gesture by President Trump—and the way she publicly acknowledged it—offers a moment of human connection in the midst of grief. The story also reflects how personal relationships can transcend political divides, even in highly‑polarized times.

Prediction Markets Slash Odds of President Trump’s Tariff Victory at Supreme Court

(Getty Images/John Baggaley)

Prediction markets have lowered the likelihood of President Trump prevailing in a key Supreme Court case concerning his tariff authority to just 24 percent. The case, centered on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), has drawn national attention due to its potential to redefine executive control over trade policy.

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in early November 2025. Multiple justices signaled doubt over whether the IEEPA grants the president authority to impose tariffs without direct congressional approval. Questions from Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch focused on whether the law was intended to permit such broad economic actions, or merely authorize sanctions and embargoes in times of national emergency.

Following the hearing, trading activity on prediction markets responded sharply. Kalshi and Polymarket both reported steep declines in the probability of a favorable ruling for the Trump administration, dropping to roughly 24 percent. These platforms reflect real-time sentiment among political analysts, legal observers, and market participants.

The Trump administration has defended its interpretation of IEEPA as consistent with longstanding presidential discretion in foreign policy and national security matters. Supporters argue the tariffs were a necessary tool to counter unfair trade practices and protect American industries. Critics contend the approach bypassed congressional authority and may set a precedent for unilateral executive action on economic issues.

A ruling against the administration could invalidate significant portions of the tariffs and prompt future limitations on executive power. It may also affect revenue generated through duties imposed under the policy.

The case represents one of the most consequential legal tests of presidential trade authority in recent history. With a decision expected in the coming months, the outcome could reshape how future administrations leverage emergency powers in economic matters.

Vanderbilt Faculty Revolt Against Trump’s Higher Ed Overhaul

DEI
DEI (Amy Elting/Unsplash)

More than 300 students and faculty at Vanderbilt University protested on November 5, 2025, against the Trump administration’s Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education. The agreement ties increased federal funding to a set of policy reforms that would reshape university governance, admissions, and curriculum oversight.

The compact, distributed to nine top-tier universities including Vanderbilt, outlines several key requirements: a ban on the use of race and gender in admissions decisions, a 15 percent cap on international student enrollment, a five-year tuition freeze, and structural changes to diminish academic units deemed hostile to conservative viewpoints. It also calls for increased transparency and limits on administrative costs.

While Vanderbilt has not signed the compact, its administration acknowledged receiving the proposal and stated it was engaged in discussions. That position drew criticism from a large segment of the university community. Protesters on campus voiced concern that accepting the deal would compromise academic freedom and institutional independence. A graduate student speaker warned of parallels to authoritarianism, citing 1930s Europe.

Internal polling reported by student media indicated overwhelming opposition among undergraduates. Eighty-four percent opposed continuing any engagement with the compact, and nearly 80 percent favored cutting off all discussions.

Supporters of the compact argue it brings accountability and ideological balance to institutions increasingly dominated by left-wing perspectives. They point to declining affordability, unchecked administrative growth, and one-sided curricula as reasons for federal intervention. The proposal’s backers say it prioritizes merit-based systems and fiscal responsibility without directly interfering in classroom content.

Critics counter that federal conditions—particularly ideological oversight—could undermine the autonomy of higher education. Legal scholars have raised questions about whether such terms would survive court challenges under existing First Amendment and Title IX protections.

Vanderbilt’s decision remains pending. Its next steps may set a precedent for how elite institutions respond to federal funding offers tied to cultural and structural reforms. The outcome could influence how universities nationwide handle rising scrutiny over cost, ideology, and governance.