House Passes Bill To Deport Migrants Who Assault Police Officers
The GOP-controlled House passed a measure that would require the federal government to deport any illegal immigrant who assaults a police officer over the objections of a majority of Democrats.
The legislation passed with a vote of 265 to 148, with 54 Democrats siding with the GOP. The Detain and Deport Illegal Aliens Who Assault Cops Act is the name of the legislation, which Rep. Jeff Van Drew, R-N.J., is leading.
“There is no reason that an illegal alien who attacks our law enforcement should remain in our country; that shows zero respect for our rule of law or our institutions, and they will not be positive contributors to society,” Van Drew said.
Advertisement
The bill mandates that federal authorities hold illegal immigrants in custody until deportation. It also establishes a new category of migrant inadmissibility, specifically targeting illegal immigrants accused of assaulting police, according to Van Drew.
After the bill passed, Rep. Tom Emmer, the House Majority Whip and No. 3 Republican, said, “House Democrats just voted to protect violent, illegal immigrants over our brave law enforcement officers. Once again, the Democrat Party proves they are the most anti-law enforcement party in history.”
A stunning new poll from CNN shows the Democratic Party lagging far behind the Republicans when it comes to economic issues, which stunned CNN data guru Harry Enten.
Advertisement
After months of the Democrats and their media allies trying to scare Americans about Trump’s tariff proposals, the data analyst was taken aback by the failure of their propaganda.
“You would think after all of the waves, Kate Bolduan, after the last few months, the first five months of the Donald Trump presidency, right, the first four months of the Donald Trump presidency, that you’d expect that Democrats would have this massive lead on the economy. It ain’t so. It ain’t so,” he said to CNN anchor Kate Bolduan.
“The party that is closest to your economic views. In November of 2023, it was the Republicans by 11 points. Now it’s still within that range, still within that margin of error, plus eight point advantage for the Republican Party,” the data analyst said.
“How is that possible, Democrats? How is that possible after all the recession fears, after the stock markets been doing all of this, after all the tariffs that Americans are against, and Republicans still hold an eight point lead on the economy. Are you kidding me?” he said.
“How is that — when we look for trends, how is that trending with other data that you’re pulling in?” the anchor inquired.
Advertisement
“Yes, if it was just this one CNN poll, that would be one thing. But take a look at Reuters/IPSOS. What do we see here? Party with a better economic plan. Well in May of 2024, just before Donald Trump was re-elected president, Republicans had a nine point advantage,” Enten said.
“Look at where we are now in May of 2025. The advantage actually went up by three points. Now Republicans have a 12-point advantage when it comes to the party with a better economic plan. And again, this is after months of economic — supposed economic uncertainty in which the stock market’s been going bonkers, in which the tariff wars that Americans are against have been going on. And yet, despite all of that, the Democrats are down by 12 points on the economy. This speaks to Democratic problems on the economy better than basically anything that you could possibly look at,” the stunned data analyst said.
“The Republicans still hold an advantage on the all-important key issue of the day. And that is the reason why, even if Donald Trump’s approval ratings are a little bit lower than they used to be, Republicans are not out of the ballgame because they still have a clear advantage on the economy, whether you look at CNN’s polls or whether you look at the IPSOS poll right here in which they have a 12-point advantage on the economy,” he said.
He also said Republicans have taken a stronghold on the middle-class vote.
Shock New Revelations Regarding Trump Accuser E. Jean Carroll Drop - This Is Why She's Under Investigation
E. Jean Carroll’s rape allegations against President Donald Trump were never credible, and now she’s under investigation by the Department of Justice for perjury.
Now, Byron York is digging into the case and has uncovered what could be the most elaborate political setup in history.
Critics of Carroll have long argued that major inconsistencies and unanswered questions surrounding her allegations against Trump undermine the credibility of the claims.
Carroll accused Trump of sexually assaulting her sometime in the mid-1990s. Critics frequently point to her inability to identify a precise year. They also argue that aspects of the timeline and surrounding details remain difficult to reconcile.
Skeptics have also questioned why Carroll waited decades before publicly making the accusation. This is especially true given that they came near the height of the “Me Too” movement.
Carroll has offered multiple explanations for remaining silent for years. They include concerns about her Republican mother’s health and fears that going public politically could inadvertently benefit Trump.
Oh. Right. You bet.
She waited until 2019 to ‘disclose’ her allegations. But she didn’t go to police. Didn’t go to a lawyer. She didn’t even go to a journalist. Rather, she made the allegation in a book. And why? Well, that was the only way to generate royalties:
And Carroll had a history of grifting, too. Before the book even dropped, she was charging admission for her “Most Hideous Men in NYC Walking Tour,” a 90-minute #MeToo landmark stroll through Manhattan. The tour started at the Bergdorf Goodman entrance on 58th Street, which just so happens to be exactly where she claims she first encountered Trump the day of the alleged assault. She had been leading paying groups past that spot before she’d told the world what had supposedly happened there.
Now here’s where the origins of these allegations get genuinely interesting. Carroll, by then a certified celebrity of the anti-Trump resistance, attended a party at writer Molly Jong-Fast’s Manhattan home, a gathering the New York Times described as “Resistance Twitter come to life.” The guest list included George Conway, who apparently advised Carroll to sue Trump for defamation.
The case got a critical boost when the New York legislature passed the Adult Survivors Act in 2022, which allowed sexual assault claims to be filed regardless of expired statutes of limitations. Carroll had helped advocate for the bill. The Act went into effect on November 24, 2022, and within hours, Carroll filed a second suit, this time adding a rape allegation in addition to defamation.
Tech billionaire Reid Hoffman, founder of LinkedIn and a virulent anti-Trump guy, bankrolled all of it. But Carroll testified under oath that no one was paying her legal fees. She described it as a “contingency case.”
It was just before the trial began that her own attorney wrote to Trump’s legal team admitting that Carroll had “recollected additional information” while preparing for testimony.
Trump’s lawyers stated that the “belated disclosure” raised “significant concerns” about Carroll’s “bias and motive.”
Hoffman carries political baggage of his own. In 2018, Hoffman apologized after it was revealed he had funded a group that secretly mimicked Russian disinformation to help a Democrat win an Alabama Senate seat.
Now, York says, investigators are digging deeper into the broader origins of the anti-Trump legal and political apparatus.
This includes the network of activist lawyers, wealthy donors, resistance groups, and strategically timed legal maneuvers that critics argue helped fuel years of coordinated lawfare against Trump.
For conservatives, the emerging scrutiny feels long overdue.
WATCH IT: Trump Shreds 'Fake News' Kristen Welker, Storms Out of Interview
Washington, D.C. - June 8, 2026
President Trump Abruptly Ends Meet the Press Interview During Discussion of California Elections
President Donald Trump walked out of an interview with NBC’s Meet the Press host Kristen Welker on Sunday after a heated exchange over the slow vote-counting process in California’s recent elections. The interview, conducted in Wisconsin, covered topics including negotiations with Iran and the status of several California races that remained unresolved days after Election Day.
Interview Context and Escalation
The discussion turned contentious when the conversation shifted to California, where multiple races continued to see shifts in results as additional ballots were processed. Trump criticized the extended timeline for finalizing vote counts, describing the system as flawed and comparing it unfavorably to processes in other countries. He pointed to changes in leads in certain contests as evidence of problems with how votes are tallied and reported.
Welker responded that the counting method follows standard procedures in California. Trump expressed frustration with what he viewed as inadequate media scrutiny of the delays and vote swings. The exchange ended with Trump stating that he had had enough of the discussion.
“So let’s call it quits because I’ve had enough. Thank you, darling, have a good time.”
Trump then left the interview.
California Election Developments
Several California races, including contests in Los Angeles and state legislative districts, remained too close to call or saw leads narrow in the days following the June 2 primary. In one notable example, a candidate who held a substantial lead on election night saw that margin reduced significantly with the arrival of later ballot batches. Additional ballots are still expected in some areas.
U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California Bill Essayli has indicated that his office is examining potential irregularities in the state’s election processes. Officials have attributed the delays to standard procedures for processing mail-in and provisional ballots, while critics argue that the extended timelines undermine public confidence in the results.
Broader Reactions and Statements
Trump has long voiced concerns about election administration in certain states, including questions about 2020. During the interview, he linked the current California situation to wider issues of electoral integrity and media coverage. Welker maintained that the process reflects established state practices.
The abrupt conclusion of the interview drew immediate attention on social media and in news coverage. Supporters of the president praised his decision to end the exchange, while critics described the walkout as an overreaction to routine questioning.
The interview had also touched on U.S. efforts regarding Iran and the path toward any potential agreement to end ongoing conflict. Those portions of the discussion did not appear to trigger the same level of tension as the segment on California elections.
Implications for Public Discourse
The episode highlights ongoing tensions between the Trump administration and segments of the national media. Trump has frequently accused major outlets of biased coverage, particularly on election-related matters. Media representatives, including Welker, have defended their role in asking pointed questions of public officials.
California election officials have stated that the current counting timeline is consistent with past practices in the state, which relies heavily on mail voting. However, the extended period before final certification has prompted renewed calls from some quarters for reforms aimed at faster and more transparent tabulation.
As additional ballots continue to be counted in California, several races remain fluid. The U.S. Attorney’s review adds another layer of scrutiny to the process. The full transcript and video of the Trump-Welker exchange are expected to be released by NBC in the coming days.
