Category: Conservative Review
‘Not. One. Story.’ Liberal news outlets’ silence regarding Biden’s ‘enemies list’ is deafening
The liberal media wasted a great deal of airtime and ink over the past decade fearmongering about the Russian collusion narrative but clammed up earlier this year when the Trump administration produced receipts demonstrating that the basis of multiple investigations and numerous arrests was nothing more than a hoax perpetrated on the American people by the Obama administration.
In the wake of revelations this week about Operation Arctic Frost — chiefly about the Biden FBI’s surveillance of Republican lawmakers and indiscriminate targeting of conservatives — the liberal media has once again proven strategically incurious, evidencing the unidirectional nature of their outrage.
‘They screamed when Nixon’s “enemy list” was exposed.’
The New York Times, for instance, has concern–mongered in recent weeks about personnel changes at the Justice Department and the Trump administration’s alleged use of “the federal government’s vast intelligence gathering and law enforcement authority to cast the specter of criminality on Mr. Trump’s enemies.”
However, with the apparent exception of an Oct. 7 article focusing on Republican denunciations of special counsel Jack Smith’s covert collection of lawmakers’ phone records and an Oct. 21 article boosting denials issued on Smith’s behalf by his lawyers, the Times has avoided troubling itself with questions about Arctic Frost or the latest documents highlighting the Biden FBI’s targeting of conservatives.
The Times was far from the only liberal publication to ignore the documents released this week by Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley (R) and the House Judiciary Committee revealing the massive scope of the Arctic Frost dragnet.
The Washington Post, CBS News, ABC News, and the Atlantic similarly appear to have largely ignored the matter, publishing little to nothing this week on the latest bombshells.
RELATED: Damning new docs reveal who’s on Biden admin’s ‘enemies list,’ expose extent of FBI’s Arctic Frost
Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images
CNN’s coverage this month appears to be limited to a piece boosting denials on Smith’s behalf and an analysis piece by senior reporter Aaron Blake, who did his apparent best to downplay the finding that Smith had covertly obtained the phone records of Republican lawmakers.
Blake claimed that the “GOP is exaggerating the evidence”; that the evidence does not “fit what is traditionally understood to constitute ‘spying'”; that the surveillance of lawmakers’ communications is not unprecedented; and that “we certainly don’t have evidence that it was done for political purposes.”
While MSNBC, NBC News, and Politico seemed interested in engaging with the story prior to this week, their efforts were apparently focused on downplaying the findings, portraying Smith as a victim, and painting Arctic Frost as an apolitical investigation and Republicans’ concerns as unhinged.
Trump ally Roger Stone noted, “They screamed when Nixon’s ‘enemy list’ was exposed. Why aren’t the media and the Democrats talking about the Arctic Frost TARGET LIST — the ultimate weaponization of the criminal justice system?”
Tom Bevan, the president of RealClearPolitics, expressed amazement, writing on Thursday morning, “No mention of Arctic Frost in the NY Times or the Washington Post. These are not ‘news’ organizations any more.”
Bevan added, “Same on CNN, ABC News, CBS News … and NBC News. Not. One. Story.”
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.) said Wednesday that what is revealed in the latest document dumps regarding Arctic Frost “is nothing short of a Biden administration enemies list. I’m old enough to understand how toxic a term that was under Richard Nixon. This is far worse — far worse, orders of magnitude worse.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Vance calls out Massie for bucking the GOP ‘on every single issue,’ making ‘too many enemies’
Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky fired back after Vice President JD Vance criticized the lawmaker for constantly bucking their party.
Vance spoke at the University of Mississippi Wednesday night to continue the Turning Point USA’s college campus tour following Charlie Kirk’s assassination. In remembrance of Kirk, Vance opened the floor to thousands of students to ask questions.
‘You’re eventually going to make too many enemies.’
One attendee asked Vance why President Donald Trump went after Massie, raising concerns that this conflict would discourage independent thinking within the Republican Party.
“This one is hard for me,” Vance said. “And the reason it’s hard for me is because Thomas Massie and I — he’s one of the first people that ever reached out to me about my book or about political office. I’ve known Thomas Massie well before I ever got involved in politics.”
RELATED: Senate Republicans betray Trump, help Democrats try to block tariffs
Photo by OLIVER CONTRERAS/AFP via Getty Images
“I think the problem with Thomas — and I’ve told him this in private, and now I guess I’ll say it again in public — is it’s one thing to disagree with the party on a particular issue,” Vance added. “It’s one thing to have your independent stand on a number of questions — and by the way, some of this stuff where Thomas Massie has been independent from the Republican Party, I’ve agreed with.”
Vance went on to argue that despite their friendship, Massie’s ideological stubbornness, no matter how principled, has cost him the president’s support.
“Being independent, having your own opinions is one thing,” Vance said. “Voting against the party on every single issue, you’re eventually going to make too many enemies. And that is the problem that Thomas has had. It’s not one issue. It’s not three or four issues. It’s that every time that we’ve needed Thomas for a vote, he has been completely unwilling to provide it.”
“Politics is politics,” Vance added. “And when you always vote against the party, you can’t expect the party to actually back it.”
RELATED: Vance casts tiebreaking Senate vote after Republicans join Democrats to tank Trump’s tariffs
Photo by BRYAN DOZIER/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images
Massie argued that if the party demands total compliance on every vote and leaves no room for debate, it risks alienating many voters who may not check every policy box on the party platform. Massie also did not shy away from calling out the party’s policies he objected to, saying he “won’t be their yes man.”
“The lady at TPUSA last night addressed an issue many young Republicans have with our party today,” Massie said of the attendee who approached Vance. “90% of my votes align with the Republican platform, yet there seems to be no room for dissent or debate. Our tent shrinks if party leaders demand 100% compliance.”
“When leaders of my own party protect sex traffickers, spend our grandkids into oblivion, fund endless wars, lockdown our citizens, bailout corporations, bow to other countries, and hurt small farmers … it’s true that I won’t be their yes man,” Massie said in a post on X.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Watch What Happens When Democrat Rep’s Talking Point Blows Up In Her Face
‘I disagree with your characterization’
NATO Member’s Top Court Considers Whether Saying Men And Women Are Different Is A War Crime
Finland’s Supreme Court heard arguments Thursday about whether quoting the Bible is illegal ‘hate speech’ under its war crimes laws.
Is this the insidious reason Biden’s FBI chose ‘Arctic Frost’ for anti-Trump weaponized investigation?
“Arctic Frost” was an FBI operation greenlit in April 2022 by former Director Christopher Wray and ex-Attorney General Merrick Garland that targeted various individuals supportive of President Donald Trump and/or skeptical of the results of the 2020 election.
The investigation, which was formally assigned to special counsel Jack Smith in November 2022, ultimately resulted in the four-count indictment Smith filed in August 2023 accusing Trump of attempting to disrupt the lawful transfer of power.
It turns out that the partisan nature of the investigation was baked in at the outset — right into its name.
‘They were so out of control, and thought they never would get caught.’
Following Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley’s (R) publication of documents on Friday showing that Wray, Garland, and former Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco approved the opening of Arctic Frost, Mike Howell, president of the Oversight Project, stated that “what you should know is that they were so out of control, and thought they never would get caught, that they named this investigation after an orange to mock Trump.”
RELATED: Damning new docs reveal who’s on Biden admin’s ‘enemies list,’ expose extent of FBI’s Arctic Frost
Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
Arctic frost is the name of a satsuma mandarin orange hybrid. Early in its investigation into Operation Arctic Frost, the Oversight Project revealed that “the corrupt FBI agents who opened this case named it this to mock” Trump.
Many of Trump’s detractors — including disgraced former FBI Director James Comey — have in years past suggested that he has an orange pigmentation.
In addition to serving as a nod to fellow Trump antagonists, the alleged naming of the operation as an intended insult to Trump signals that it was, from its very inception, nothing more than a partisan campaign aimed at the ruination of the president and his allies.
Blaze News has reached out to the FBI for comment.
Editor’s note: Mike Howell is a contributor at Blaze News.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Fearmongering over Medicare hides the real fix seniors need
Democrats are casting the shutdown showdown as a battle over health care costs, tapping into widespread anxiety over the cost of health care, especially among those enrolled in Medicare. For them, it’s politics. But for millions of American seniors, the worry is real — not just a convenient talking point.
Recent polling shows 58% of Medicare recipients 65 and over are concerned about future health care costs, and half are worried a major health situation could result in either debt or bankruptcy.
If left unchanged, Medicare will be unable to pay full benefits by 2036.
While medical debt is a growing concern among Medicare recipients, the staggering size of the federal debt — largely driven by Medicare spending — is a ticking time bomb Congress can no longer ignore. As one of the largest federal spending programs, Medicare consisted of a jarring $874 billion out of the $6.75 trillion federal budget (about 13 cents of every dollar spent in FY2024).
While Medicare receives some funding from premiums paid by enrollees, the single largest source of revenue comes from the federal government’s general fund. If left unchanged, Medicare will be unable to pay full benefits by 2036.
Medicare Advantage toes the line
Fortunately, policy solutions exist that can help both seniors and taxpayers.
Medicare Advantage merges public financing with private delivery under accountability. The government pays a fixed amount per enrollee to private plans, calibrated by benchmarks and quality measures. Plans that achieve higher star ratings — which were just released for 2026 by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services earlier this month — receive bonus payments. Meanwhile, poor performers lose ground.
This structure introduces incentives for efficiency and quality that are lacking in traditional Medicare. Yet, successive years of cuts to how Medicare Advantage plans are reimbursed have forced several major insurers to announce they’re withdrawing from certain Medicare Advantage markets next year.
Companies like UnitedHealth, Humana, Aetna, as well as regional plans such as UCare (serving Minnesota and parts of Wisconsin) and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Vermont, are withdrawing from select Medicare Advantage counties across the country, citing rising costs. Seniors are using more medical services than expected, driving up claims, while federal reimbursement rates are being cut. Added regulatory and administrative burdens (such as expanded reporting requirements and prior authorization rules) further limit insurers. Together, these pressures make participation unsustainable in some markets.
If unchanged, more insurers will leave Medicare Advantage, and options for seniors will continue to shrink. Meanwhile, Medicare costs are growing much faster than private health care spending.
In 2023, traditional Medicare spent $15,689 per enrollee, more than double the private sector amount. This is a result of the traditional fee-for-service model, which pays providers per treatment instead of per patient, rewarding volume over outcomes, encouraging unnecessary care, and driving up costs.
Conversely, Medicare Advantage’s structure encourages prevention and coordination. To attract enrollees, Medicare Advantage offers supplemental benefits such as vision, dental, hearing, wellness programs, transportation, and over‑the‑counter benefits. Many Medicare Advantage plans now include these extras at little or no additional cost. That flexibility helps tailor benefits to beneficiary needs.
Better treatment, lower costs
When allowed to work, Medicare Advantage delivers higher satisfaction, lower costs, and greater access to coverage than traditional Medicare. One Harvard study found that seniors enrolled in Medicare Advantage had better health outcomes than seniors on traditional Medicare. A National Institutes of Health review of hundreds of studies found that Medicare Advantage provided significantly better quality of care and health outcomes than traditional Medicare by a factor of four to one. Another NIH study found that across 48 studies, Medicare Advantage enrollees received more preventative care and had fewer hospitalizations and emergency visits, shorter stays, and lower total spending.
The financial and quality advantages are clear. One study comparing expected out‑of‑pocket costs in Medicare Advantage versus traditional Medicare found that from 2014 to 2019, projected costs were 18% to 24% lower under Medicare Advantage. For seniors on fixed incomes — that is significant.
RELATED: Democrats deny shutdown is about health care for illegal aliens — then one admits the truth
Photo by Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images
Seniors get it. This year, the majority of Medicare beneficiaries are enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans. Over the last two decades, enrollment in Medicare Advantage has skyrocketed. Unsurprisingly, polling shows 93% of Medicare Advantage enrollees were satisfied or very satisfied with their coverage, and 94% would recommend it to their family and friends. The Congressional Budget Office now projects that by 2034, Medicare Advantage could account for nearly two-thirds of all Medicare beneficiaries.
The model for the future
Medicare Advantage provides the model for quality, affordable health care for seniors that aligns with what they prefer. Reducing regulatory burdens and barriers within the insurance market will provide Medicare Advantage plans greater flexibility and even entice those insurers leaving the Medicare Advantage market to reconsider.
Medicare cannot continue as purely fee‑for‑service without reform — neither for the medical and financial health of Americans, nor for the sake of the federal budget. The current fiscal challenges plaguing the federal budget demand models that can bend the cost curve while improving quality. Medicare Advantage is not a cure-all, but it is among the most promising tools in the toolbox.
Josh Hawley Is Making The Wrong Argument For More Food Stamp Welfare
Hawley needs to explain why it’s imperative that we turn the welfare hose back on without including measures to prevent taxpayer-funded ‘assistance’ going to anyone but the most desperate.
