President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address February24, 2026 at 9 p.m.
Comer Statement on Trump’s State of the Union Address
WASHINGTON—House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) issued the following statement ahead of President Donald J. Trump’s State of the Union address:
“Our State of the Union is stronger than ever, thanks to President Trump’s unwavering commitment to fulfilling his promises to the American people. In just over one year, this administration has taken decisive action to reverse dangerous Biden-era open border policies, strengthen public safety by removing criminal illegal aliens from our communities, restore American energy dominance by ending the radical Green New Deal agenda, and bring common sense back to Washington by rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse across the federal government. America’s future is bright under President Trump’s leadership, and our work is far from done. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee will continue to deliver on its mission by working with President Trump and his administration to ensure the federal government operates effectively, efficiently, and transparently for all Americans.”
A large snowball fight in Washington Square Park (Manhattan) after the winter storm escalated into a police incident after snowballs were thrown at NYPD officers. According to police accounts reported by local outlets, officers arrived around 4 p.m. responding to a call about people on a roof inside the park. Soon after, multiple officers were struck by snowballs and suffered facial lacerations, with several taken to the hospital for treatment.
Later that night, NYPD Commissioner Jessica Tisch publicly condemned what was shown in circulating videos, calling the behavior “disgraceful” and “criminal,” and confirming that detectives opened an investigation to identify those involved. Police unions also pushed for arrests and charges, arguing it was not “harmless fun” once officers were targeted.
The White House says President Trump hosted “Angel Families” in an East Room ceremony to honor Americans killed by people described as criminal illegal immigrants, marking the second anniversary of Laken Riley’s murder and signing a proclamation naming February 22 as National Angel Family Day. Family members shared stories of their loved ones and praised Trump for focusing on border enforcement, while one officer said he had previously arrested the suspect later accused of killing Riley and argued the system failed because there was no detainer, accountability, or deportation. The statement frames the event as both a memorial and a policy message: the administration claims the border is now highly secure and vows to keep removing dangerous offenders so other families don’t face the same loss.
President Trump Honors Angel Families, Remembers American Lives Lost to Illegal Immigration
Today, President Donald J. Trump welcomed Angel Families to the White House for an emotional ceremony honoring American lives tragically taken by criminal illegal aliens who never should have been in our country. Paying solemn tribute to the second anniversary of Laken Riley’s murder, President Trump signed a Proclamation designating February 22 as National Angel Family Day — a day of remembrance for victims and their grieving loved ones devastated by the consequences of open border policies.
With America’s border now the most secure in history, the Trump Administration remains unwavering in its commitment to remove dangerous criminal illegal aliens from our communities, ensure accountability, and make sure not one more American family has to endure this pain.
Allyson Phillips, whose 22-year-old daughter, Laken Riley, was killed by an illegal alien while out for a run in Georgia: “If you’ve lived that nightmare that we have lived, you understand the importance of the job that he is doing in securing our nation and fighting for our families — because this could be any family.” (Watch)
Steve Ronnebeck, whose 21-year-old son, Grant, was shot and killed by an illegal alien while working at an Arizona convenience store: “President Trump talked about Grant even before he was elected in 2016 — and finally, we had hope… Now, today, we are finally going to see that somebody’s going to remember all of our loved ones.” (Watch)
Laura Wilkerson, whose son, Joshua, was tortured and killed by his illegal alien classmate: “I met a man about 11 years ago who was running for office and he sat with us a couple days, and he watched as the tears rolled down my face as I told him the story of how our youngest son, Joshua, was brutally beaten, tortured, strangled to death, and his body set on fire. The man next to me was President Trump. He never, ever, looked away from my pain. He looked me straight in the eye and he said, ‘I will never forget the story of your sweet son, and I will never give up fighting for the American family.’ … He has never missed a day of fighting for the American family.” (Watch)
Marie Vega, whose son, former U.S. Marine and Border Patrol Agent Javier ‘Harvey’ Vega, Jr., was ambushed by two illegal aliens during a family fishing trip: “Thank God we have you in office. Without you, America, and the world, would not know the consequences of open borders. Thank you for restoring law and order. Thank you for acknowledging us — the Angel Families.” (Watch)
Jody Jones, whose brother, Rocky, was shot and killed by an illegal alien: “I’m sick and tired of hearing these Democrat politicians stand up on these podiums and say how sorry they are for seeing these criminal illegal aliens being ‘ripped apart’ from their families. What about us? What about the American family? What about us? We mean something, too, and this man right here understands it.” (Watch)
Officer Ethan Curreri, who arrested the illegal alien that would go on to murder Laken Riley months later: “I personally arrested José Ibarra for endangering the welfare of a child. A few months later, I saw his face again in the news after he viciously murdered Laken Riley. I did my job. I put him in custody. The system failed; no detainer, no accountability, no deportation, and an innocent American life was taken. If you enter our country illegally, there will be consequences under this Administration.”
During a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) called on the Department of Justice to investigate and prosecute what he described as ‘dark money’ networks. Hawley named billionaire-linked networks tied to George Soros and Neville Roy Singham, urging federal action to hold these organisations accountable.
Sen. Josh Hawley used a Senate homeland-security hearing this week to press a familiar Washington theme—follow the money—but in a setting that fused immigration unrest, nonprofit finance and allegations of foreign influence into a single prosecutorial pitch.
In the clip circulating online under the headline “‘Soros, Singham networks funding…’: Hawley ‘exposes’ dark money groups in Minnesota at fiery hearing,” Hawley (R., Mo.) argued that recent anti-ICE protests in Minnesota were less “spontaneous” than “highly organized,” and he urged the Justice Department to “untangle” what he called a “dark money” web and bring prosecutions where possible.
“A broad ecosystem”—and a number: $60 million
The exchange turns on testimony from Seamus Bruner of the Government Accountability Institute, whom Hawley cited as an investigator of nonprofit funding networks. Bruner told senators he had “tracked over $60 million” in payments—derived from IRS Form 990 disclosures—to “approximately 14 groups” that he said were active “on the ground” in Minnesota.
Hawley seized on the figure to argue that a large, multi-entity funding architecture sits behind street-level protest activity—an architecture he described as opaque by design because nonprofit pass-through structures can make it difficult to identify original sources of funds.
Who did the witness name?
In the portion of the hearing highlighted in Hawley’s office release, Bruner listed a range of organizations and advocacy groups he said showed up in his Minnesota-focused mapping, including the ACLU (which he described as providing legal defense and training support) and other national and local groups. Among those he named were Democracy Forward, TakeAction Minnesota, Indivisible, the National Lawyers Guild, CTUL, CAIR-Minnesota, Minnesota 350, and Voices for Racial Justice.
Bruner characterized this as an “ecosystem” rather than a single organization directing events—mixing legal support, organizing capacity and communications infrastructure.
The funding theory: “networks” and pass-through pipes
Pressed on where the money comes from, Bruner pointed to what he called major “networks,” including the Soros/Open Society sphere, the Arabella funding network and the Neville Roy Singham funding network, along with other large philanthropic channels. The alleged mechanism, he suggested, is straightforward: money moves through donor-advised funds and nonprofit intermediaries and arrives as large checks to local entities.
Hawley framed that pattern as a law-enforcement problem, not just a political-finance debate, arguing that if money is financing illegal conduct—assaults on officers, property damage or interference with law enforcement—then prosecutions should follow.
“Foreign money” as the accelerant
The hearing clip also elevates a second, more explosive claim: that some of the money behind U.S. protests may be foreign-linked. Bruner repeatedly invoked Singham—describing him as an American citizen living in China with pro-CCP sympathies—and also referenced Swiss billionaire Hansjörg Wyss in connection with Arabella-aligned vehicles, echoing prior media reporting he cited. Hawley used the allegations to argue that foreign influence should strip away any deference typically afforded to domestic political speech.
The backdrop: Minnesota as a national flashpoint
Hawley’s hearing moment is landing amid a larger national fight over the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement surge in Minnesota, which triggered mass demonstrations and intense scrutiny after the fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens during enforcement actions—events that have fueled political backlash and multiple congressional inquiries.
That context matters because it helps explain why Minnesota, rather than a border state, has become the stage for an argument about nonprofit money and protest logistics: the state has been treated by both parties as a test case for where immigration enforcement ends and civil unrest begins.
What the hearing does—and doesn’t—establish
The testimony Hawley highlighted relies on two different kinds of claims that often get blurred in political media:
Accounting claims (Form 990-based mapping of grants and payments among nonprofits) can illuminate financial relationships and the size of funding streams.
Operational claims (that specific dollars funded riots, violence, or coordinated interference with law enforcement) require additional proof tying funding to specific actions and intent.
In other words, tracing grants to organizations is not the same as proving direction of illegal conduct—something Hawley effectively acknowledged by making DOJ action the endpoint of his argument: investigate first, prosecute where the facts allow.
Date: February 10, 2026
1) Setting and what Hawley was trying to establish
In a Homeland Security Subcommittee hearing chaired by Sen. Josh Hawley, the line of questioning pivots from broad program fraud to public disorder/anti-ICE unrest in Minnesota and the claim that it was not spontaneous, but organized and financially supported through “dark money” nonprofit networks.
Hawley’s objective in this segment is basically a chain:
(a) protests/riots in Minnesota show signs of coordination → (b) coordination suggests infrastructure (training, legal support, comms, logistics) → (c) infrastructure requires funding → (d) funding allegedly traces back to large donor networks (some described as foreign-linked) → (e) therefore DOJ should investigate and, where possible, prosecute.
That “DOJ investigation + prosecution” demand is Hawley’s closing theme in the press release and the hearing clip.
2) What the “on-the-ground” witness claimed about organization and tactics
A) “Highly organized and coordinated”
Minnesota State Sen. Mark Koran (as described in the press release) answers Hawley’s “spontaneous vs organized” question by saying the activity is “highly organized and coordinated,” with a mix of national and professional agitation groups plus local reporting that “30,000 observers” were trained to insert themselves into protests.
B) Tactics alleged
Koran describes (as allegations/observations) a package of tactics:
Doxxing (described as “highly coordinated”)
Violence against federal agents (including severe injury claims)
Projectiles (frozen bottles, stones, etc.)
Direct interference with law enforcement operations
C) Alleged involvement of state/local officials
Koran also claims some elected officials in the Minneapolis area were “involved,” including participation in chats and at least one named state representative (as transcribed in your text). This is presented as assertion, not proven finding, in the clip.
3) The nonprofit-funding witness: what he says he tracked and what that means
Hawley then turns to Seamus Bruner (Government Accountability Institute), introduced as someone who tracks nonprofit funding networks, and asks the core question: “What organizations have been active on the ground in Minnesota?”
Bruner’s central funding claims are:
He says he tracked “over $60 million” (based on IRS Form 990 disclosures) to ~14 groups tied to Minnesota protest activity.
He says the money originates through large donor/funding “networks,” naming:
Soros network (often shorthand for Open Society–linked giving)
Arabella funding network
Neville Roy Singham funding network
and “many others” (he also references large philanthropic networks generally)
He characterizes the structure as multi-entity pass-through funding that can obscure the original donor (“washed through multiple times”), then lands as large checks to organizations operating “on the ground.”
Important framing: in this hearing segment, these are testimony-level assertions about flows and purpose (protest/riot support), not adjudicated conclusions.
4) “What organizations have been active on the ground in Minnesota?” (the named list)
From your transcript (and consistent with Hawley’s office summary that Bruner listed Minnesota-active groups), the witness explicitly names the following as part of the Minnesota ecosystem he says received funding:
ACLU (described as providing legal defense and facilitating trainings)
Democracy Forward
TakeAction Minnesota (he singles this out as receiving over $10 million from large NGO networks)
Indivisible
National Lawyers Guild
CTUL (Centro de Trabajadores Unidos en Lucha)
CAIR-Minnesota (Council on American-Islamic Relations, Minnesota)
Minnesota 350
Voices for Racial Justice
He presents this as a non-exhaustive list (“on and on”) within the broader “~14 groups” and “$60 million” claim.
5) How “dark money” and “foreign money” are used in the argument
In the clip, “dark money” is used in the colloquial political sense: money routed through nonprofit entities and pass-through structures that may not clearly identify original donors (especially depending on entity type and reporting). Bruner claims the structure makes it difficult to see “ultimate” donors and says this is intentionally opaque.
Then the exchange escalates into “foreign money” concerns. Bruner claims the most concerning aspect is foreign-linked funding, and the discussion focuses heavily on Neville Roy Singham and also mentions Swiss billionaire Hansjörg Wyss as a funder of Arabella-aligned vehicles (in the witness’s telling).
New York City is recruiting lifeguards now (yes, in winter) to prepare for the summer season and keep pools and beaches safer. Qualifying tests are held across all five boroughs through the winter, and February 28, 2026 is the last day to register. To qualify, applicants must be at least 16 by July 18, 2026, pass a vision exam (with specific minimum vision standards), and complete a 50-yard swim in 50 seconds or less using proper form. City officials say more lifeguards means more open swim time, more lessons, and a safer, more enjoyable summer for everyone. Registration and details are on NYC Parks’ Lifeguard Qualifying .
On February 5, 2026, the amendment was brought up for a vote. Every Democratic member of the New York State Senate voted against the proposal, so it failed.
Once upon a winter day in New York State, a State Senator named Mark Walczyk had an idea to help everyday people. Many families were struggling with very high utility bills — the cost of keeping their lights on and homes warm was putting a strain on their wallets. NYsenate.gov
Senator Walczyk thought, “There’s money that’s been set aside but not used. What if we returned that money to people so their bills could be a little lower?” So he proposed a plan to take $2 billion of unused funds and use it to give credits on utility bills, which could help families pay less. nysenate.gov/
But when it was time for the measure to be voted on in the New York State Senate, something surprising happened. Every Democratic Senator said no to the plan. They all voted against it — even though it was meant to take effect right away and help with the high costs people were facing. nysenate.gov/
Senator Walczyk was disappointed. He said that this was a missed chance to help New Yorkers struggling with energy costs. And that’s how the day’s big idea to lower energy bills ended — not with a yes, but with a big no in the Senate.
What the Proposed Measure Would Do
The proposal was offered as an amendment on the floor of the New York State Senate by Republican senators including Mark Walczyk and Tom O’Mara.
It aimed to provide immediate relief for New Yorkers facing high utility bills by allowing unused funds in the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority’s (NYSERDA) Climate Investment Account to be returned directly to utility ratepayers as bill credits. Around $2 billion was cited as available from previously collected surcharges that hadn’t yet been spent.
Sponsors argued these funds were already paid by ratepayers through charges on their utility bills and could be used to offset steep increases in energy costs many households face.
Why Democrats Opposed It
There hasn’t been a detailed official public explanation in the press release itself of Democrats’ specific reasoning for voting against this particular amendment. However, broader reporting on the context around utility-cost policy in Albany shows:
The Democratic majority in the Senate has been advancing a separate legislative package focused on longer-term utility rate reforms — including changes to how utility rates are set and how regulatory authority is exercised — rather than one-time refunds or credits. nysenate.gov/
Democratic leaders have emphasized systemic changes to the rate-setting process through bills meant to increase transparency, strengthen the Public Service Commission’s oversight, and protect consumers over time, rather than simply returning existing funds as credits. timesunion.com
Some analysts and social media discussions note that Democrats may prefer a more comprehensive overhaul of energy policy and rate structures rather than targeted bill credits that Republicans proposed in this amendment.
What connection does this “climate fund” have to reality, and why are people being charged for it?
What is this fund and who manages it? This refers to climate and “green” accounts administered by NYSERDA — the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. The money is accumulated in various climate and energy programs under the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA).
Formally, this is not a single “wallet,” but a collection of funds and accounts into which money flows for climate-related goals.
Where does the money come from (the key point)? ❗ These are not abstract grants or “money out of thin air.”
The main sources are:
surcharges and add-ons in electricity and gas bills;
fees imposed on energy companies, which are passed on to consumers;
revenues from emissions allowance trading;
mandatory “climate contributions” built into utility rates.
In simple terms: ordinary residents and businesses pay for it every month through their utility bills.
What is the official purpose of collecting this money?
The stated goals are:
transition to “clean energy”;
reduction of CO₂ emissions;
subsidies for solar panels, heat pumps, and electric vehicles;
grants for “green” projects and NGOs;
funding long-term climate programs through 2030–2040.
On paper, this looks like an investment in the future.
Where does the disconnect with reality arise?
This is where issues of trust and common sense begin:
People pay now, while the benefits are hypothetical and deferred. Bills are rising today. The “climate benefits” are promised in 10–20 years.
The fund is weakly connected to actual bill reductions. In practice, climate programs more often increase utility rates than decrease them.
Money accumulates while the crisis is ignored. When billions of dollars sit unused in accounts, yet people are told, “Be patient, now is not the time to return the money,” that starts to look like bureaucratic absurdity rather than climate policy.
Lack of emergency logic. Climate change is a long-term issue. Rising utility bills are an urgent social problem. Yet authorities consciously place ideology above people’s ability to pay.
Why critics see this fund as disconnected from reality
Because:
the fund does not protect consumers, but uses them as a source of financing;
money is collected mandatorily, but not returned even during crises;
decisions are made by technocrats and politicians, while ordinary ratepayers foot the bill;
climate rhetoric is used as a universal justification for additional charges.
In effect, it looks like this:
“We know you’re struggling, but the climate matters more than your heating bill.”
In its current form, the climate fund:
has a weak connection to people’s everyday reality;
is financed through what amounts to a hidden tax in utility bills;
is treated as untouchable reserve money, even when households are suffocating under rising costs.
That is why the refusal to return at least part of these funds looks less like care for the future and more like indifference to the present.
The segment argues that the Washington Post’s reported layoffs under Jeff Bezos reflect a broader collapse in trust and demand for legacy media, with Brianna Lyman claiming readers are abandoning outlets they view as partisan and credibility-damaged by major political narratives (Russia-collusion coverage, Kavanaugh allegations, and optimistic portrayals of Biden’s fitness). She frames the layoffs as a market correction—if a paid product doesn’t deliver value, it fails—rejecting calls for Bezos to subsidize the newsroom indefinitely. The discussion then shifts to Don Lemon, with Lyman arguing “journalism” is not legal immunity if someone obstructs or disrupts a church, and criticizing what she portrays as selective enforcement against conservatives in prior years. Finally, they highlight a U.S. investigation into Nike over alleged discrimination against white workers, using it as an example of DEI-driven corporate practices facing legal and political backlash and reiterating a merit-based hiring standard.
Washington Post layoffs, media trust
Host: I’m thrilled to be joined now by The Federalist’s elections correspondent, Brianna Lyman. Brianna, thanks so much for coming on the program tonight.
Huge news out of Washington: it looks like the paper that devoted itself to the idea of “democracy dies in darkness” is now dying a slow death itself — with publisher Jeff Bezos laying off 300 workers, about a third of the newsroom. What’s your reaction? Because while nobody cheers when a journalist is fired, it seems to me this proves the Washington Post’s business model of anti-Trump “hackery” doesn’t sell anymore. Does it?
Brianna Lyman: No. Right now — at least in the United States — trust in the mainstream media is at a record low, or as I like to call it, the “propaganda press.” And the Washington Post is a case study.
This is an outlet that pushed the Russia-collusion narrative, promoted the Kavanaugh rape smear, and insisted Biden was healthy and fully cognizant — which wasn’t true. Readers have lost trust. And when you’re being charged to read the Washington Post, you realize you’re not getting much for your money when you can go to free sites — you can go to Sky News, Fox News — and access news without the left-wing spin.
A lot of people say Bezos should have dipped into his own money and paid staffers for years. But that’s what happens when the real world collides with liberal fantasies: in a capitalist society, if your product doesn’t sell, you’re done. It’s unfortunate they lost their jobs, but if they have useful skills, they should be able to find new ones.
Host: Exactly. And you mentioned the hoaxes. This paper was used to launder all sorts of “deep state” narratives about Trump. It pushed the Steele dossier — full of claims and alleged lies — in what many saw as an attempt to influence an election. Once a newspaper is trying to be a political player in an election, it’s over, isn’t it?
Brianna Lyman: Yes. The Washington Post presents itself as neutral — “democracy dies in darkness.” But for them, democracy only “dies in darkness” when Republicans are winning.
When a Republican is in office, everything is framed as bad, illegal, unconstitutional. When a Democrat is in office, even when something is illegal or unconstitutional, it gets wiped away or swept under the rug.
Readers don’t want this anymore. They cut sections like books and sports. And people are tired of being told they have to accept ideological narratives in sports — they just want to watch sports. You can go to Fox Sports and they talk about the game, not constant political lectures. The Post could have changed years ago; it didn’t — and now it’s facing the consequences.
Secretary Rubio discusses the Critical Minerals Ministerial (0:06), an initiative aimed at diversifying global supply chains for critical minerals (0:06-0:26). He emphasizes that the current concentration of these minerals in one country poses risks of geopolitical leverage and supply disruptions (0:52-1:07).
Key points of the ministerial and related initiatives include:
Goal: To establish reliable and diverse supply chains for critical minerals, essential for technological innovation, economic strength, and national security (1:11-1:18).
Economic Challenges: Foreign competitors often undercut prices through state subsidies and unfair practices, making it economically unviable for other countries to explore and process critical minerals (1:26-1:52).
U.S. Actions: The U.S. is leading by example with permitting reform for domestic critical mineral industries and creating demand through a strategic stockpile (2:09-2:26).
Global Response: The ministerial seeks to create a global forum and launched the Forge initiative (2:32-2:46) to address this challenge, with 55 partners and more expected to join (0:08-0:16).
Future Sessions: Upcoming sessions will cover a price floor mechanism to ensure economic viability for investments in these sectors (3:12-3:29) and showcase financing tools from various U.S. departments (3:31-3:41).
Bilateral Agreements: New critical minerals frameworks are expected to be signed with several partners (3:49-3:52), highlighting the billions of dollars the U.S. government has committed to this endeavor (3:57-4:03).
Secretary Rubio also addresses specific country roles and foreign policy matters:
Ukraine: Critical minerals are vital for Ukraine’s future economic prosperity and rebuilding efforts post-war (7:14-7:42).
Argentina: Recognized as a key partner in critical minerals due to its natural resources and expertise in processing (8:33-9:11).
Iran: The U.S. is open to engaging with Iran, but talks must include their ballistic missile program, sponsorship of terrorist organizations, nuclear program, and treatment of their own people (10:04-11:20).
Morocco: Plays a crucial role due to its critical mineral deposits and willingness to invest in processing, contributing to a diversified global supply network (15:08-16:01).
A conservative advocacy group criticized LinkedIn after the social media platform temporarily removed a post supporting a Trump-era immigration enforcement policy. LinkedIn later restored the post, saying the removal was an error.
What Happened
According to Fox News, a LinkedIn spokesperson confirmed:
“This was removed in error, and we quickly corrected it.” (Fox News)
The post had been flagged as “hateful speech” by LinkedIn’s moderation system. After review and public backlash, the platform reinstated the post.
Public Reaction
The removal prompted criticism from the conservative advocacy group and some social media users, who called for boycotts of LinkedIn. Inquisitr News reported that many users saw the removal as censorship, even though LinkedIn attributed it to a mistake. (Inquisitr)
Confirmation from Other Outlets
Several other news organizations confirmed the incident:
The Federalist reported LinkedIn quickly corrected the error. (The Federalist)
AOL News noted the post was restored and emphasized that the removal was unintentional. (AOL)
While LinkedIn’s removal of the post drew criticism, the platform confirmed it was a mistake and quickly restored the content. This incident highlights the challenges social media companies face in balancing content moderation with free speech concerns.
Social Media Platforms That Have Removed Posts Supporting Trump’s Policies
Based on official statements and reports from government archives, oversight bodies, and congressional documents, several major social media platforms have removed or restricted content that supported or promoted policies associated with former (and current) President Donald Trump. These actions often involved claims related to election integrity, immigration, or public health policies during his administration, but were frequently justified by platforms under rules against misinformation, incitement to violence, or hate speech. Note that platforms’ official policies emphasize neutral enforcement, though critics, including Trump administration officials, have argued these removals disproportionately targeted conservative viewpoints. Below are key examples from authoritative sources, focusing on platforms beyond LinkedIn (as mentioned in your query snippet).
Twitter (now X): Twitter removed multiple tweets from Trump’s account that supported his policies on election security and postal voting, labeling them as disputed or misleading. For instance, during the 2020 election, tweets falsely suggesting electoral fraud (tied to Trump’s policy stance on voter integrity) were removed or hidden. The platform also permanently suspended Trump’s account on January 8, 2021, citing risks of further violence after the January 6 Capitol events, where posts echoed his policy narratives on election results. Official Twitter statements (via archived government briefings) described these as editorial decisions to prevent harm, not political bias.
Facebook: Facebook removed posts from Trump praising the January 6 events, which supporters framed as backing his immigration and law-and-order policies amid election disputes. These were deleted under the platform’s Community Standards on Dangerous Individuals and Organizations, leading to an indefinite suspension of his account (later set to two years, lifted in 2023). The Oversight Board, an independent body reviewing Facebook decisions, upheld the initial suspension but criticized the indefinite nature as inconsistent with rules. Similar removals affected content supporting Trump’s COVID-19 or election policies deemed misinformation.
Instagram (Meta-owned): As part of the same ecosystem as Facebook, Instagram applied identical restrictions, removing Trump’s posts that glorified the January 6 events (seen by some as supporting his border security and anti-fraud policies). The suspension was extended indefinitely in January 2021 for at least two weeks, later formalized to two years.
YouTube (Google-owned): YouTube suspended Trump’s channel in January 2021 for “content violating policies on incitement, including videos supporting his election-related policies that allegedly risked violence”. The suspension was lifted in March 2023. Google has general policies against incitement to hatred, which have led to removals of content aligned with conservative policy advocacy.
Other platforms like Snapchat, Twitch, and Pinterest have banned Trump-related accounts or content supporting his policies (e.g., on immigration or election fraud), but these are less documented in official government sites and more in oversight reports. Platforms maintain these actions are content-neutral, aimed at curbing harm, but analyses from sources like the White House and Congress suggest asymmetries, with conservative content flagged more often due to higher rates of associated misinformation.
Approaches to Stopping Such Removals
Official sources, including White House executive orders, congressional proposals, and think tank analyses, outline several strategies to address perceived censorship of conservative or Trump-supporting content. These range from legal reforms to promoting transparency, though viewpoints differ: Some conservatives advocate aggressive regulation to limit platform power, while others (including free speech advocates) warn that government intervention could worsen censorship. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that platforms have First Amendment rights to moderate content, but government pressure on them can be unconstitutional. Here’s a high-level overview of proposed solutions from balanced sources:
Approach
Description
Key Proponents/Sources
Potential Challenges
Reform Section 230
Amend the Communications Decency Act to strip liability protections from platforms that engage in “editorial” moderation (e.g., removing political content). This would make platforms liable for user content unless they act neutrally, potentially discouraging removals. Bills like the Stop Shielding Culpable Platforms Act aim to clarify this.
Could lead to over-removal of all content to avoid lawsuits, harming free speech overall. brookings.edu
Executive Orders and Federal Accountability
Prohibit federal agencies from pressuring platforms to censor speech. The 2025 White House order requires agencies to report and correct past misconduct, ensuring no taxpayer funds support censorship. It accuses prior administrations of coercing platforms.
Trump Administration (2020 and 2025 orders) whitehouse.gov
Enforcement relies on administration priorities; critics say it risks politicizing speech. npr.org/
Transparency and Due Process Requirements
Mandate platforms to disclose moderation policies, provide appeals for removals, and report annually on actions (e.g., how many conservative posts were removed). Legislation could require public reports on government-platform communications.
Platforms resist full disclosure; may not stop removals but increases accountability.
Promote Competition and Alternatives
Encourage new platforms (e.g., Truth Social, Parler) via antitrust actions or reduced barriers, allowing users to migrate to less-moderated spaces. Avoid nondiscrimination mandates that force platforms to host all content.
New platforms struggle with scale and app store restrictions. washingtonpost.com
Multistakeholder Guidelines
Create international forums (e.g., proposed International Forum on Content Moderation) for voluntary standards on handling political speech, including definitions of harmful content and appeals processes.
On January 30, 2026, President Donald J. Trump nominated Kevin Warsh, a former Federal Reserve Governor who navigated the 2008 financial crisis, to serve as the next Chairman of the Federal Reserve, succeeding Jerome Powell. Warsh brings extensive credentials, including degrees from Stanford and Harvard Law School, experience as a Morgan Stanley executive, and advisory roles in the Bush administration. The nomination has garnered widespread acclaim across political and financial spheres, with Republican senators such as Tim Scott, Lindsey Graham, and Bill Hagerty praising his deep monetary policy expertise, steady leadership, and potential to refocus the Fed on its core mandate of price stability and maximum employment while enhancing credibility and accountability. Business leaders including JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Suzanne Clark, and financial organizations like the Mortgage Bankers Association and American Bankers Association highlighted his prudent approach, crisis management skills, and commitment to economic growth, stability, and innovation in a complex environment.
Wide Acclaim for President Trump’s Nomination of Kevin Warsh as Fed Chair
Today, President Donald J. Trump announced his nomination of Kevin Warsh to serve as Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Mr. Warsh is exceptionally well-prepared to lead the world’s most influential central bank, with a distinguished background including degrees from Stanford University and Harvard Law School, prior roles as a Morgan Stanley executive and top economic advisor to the Bush Administration, and service as the youngest-ever Federal Reserve Governor — where he helped steer the institution through the 2008 financial crisis.
The nomination has drawn widespread praise from lawmakers, business leaders, financial experts, and industry voices across the spectrum:
Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Chairman Tim Scott: “The Federal Reserve’s decisions touch every American household, from mortgage rates to retirement savings, and President Trump has been clear that bringing accountability and credibility to the Federal Reserve is a priority, and his nomination of Kevin Warsh reflects that focus. As a former Federal Reserve Governor, Kevin has deep knowledge of markets and monetary policy that will be essential in this role. Federal Reserve independence remains paramount, and I am confident Kevin will work to instill confidence and credibility in the Fed’s monetary policy. As Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, I look forward to leading a thoughtful, timely confirmation process that carefully examines his vision for focusing the Federal Reserve on its core mission.”
Sen. Jim Banks: “Kevin Warsh is a brilliant pick by President Trump for Fed Chair. Clear from what he wrote in 2021 he understands scale of China’s ambitions. As member of Banking Committee I look forward to working with him to maintain American financial supremacy.”
Sen. Marsha Blackburn: “Kevin Warsh is exceptionally qualified to lead the Federal Reserve as Chairman. I look forward to supporting this nomination in the Senate, and I am confident Kevin will help foster economic growth and create more opportunity for hardworking Americans.”
Sen. Katie Britt: “Congratulations to Kevin Warsh on his nomination to serve as the next Chair of the Federal Reserve. Kevin brings a deep expertise and proven track record in monetary policy, including years at the Federal Reserve where he helped our nation navigate some of its most economically turbulent times. He is an exceptionally qualified candidate, and I look forward to supporting his nomination.”
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito: “@potus’ pick of Kevin Warsh to serve as @federalreserve Chairman is an excellent choice. I’ve had the [opportunity] to get to know Kevin over the years and know firsthand that he brings experience, steady leadership, and a clear understanding of the challenges facing our economy. I’m looking forward to working together.”
Sen. John Cornyn: “With decades of experience in finance & economics spanning government and the private sector, Kevin Warsh is eminently qualified to serve as Chairman of the @federalreserve. I trust with him at the helm, the Federal Reserve will help guide our nation on a path of historic prosperity & opportunity just as @POTUS has. I look forward to supporting Kevin in the Senate.”
Sen. Tom Cotton: “I commend President Trump nominating Kevin Warsh to become the next Chairman of the Federal Reserve. I look forward to working with him and President Trump to make life more affordable for Arkansans.”
Sen. Lindsey Graham: “Great pick, Mr. President. Kevin Warsh has the experience and judgment this important role demands, along with a strong combination of academic and real-world knowledge. I have every confidence that he is the right choice at the right time, and I will enthusiastically support his nomination.”
Sen. Bill Hagerty: “Congratulations to my friend Kevin Warsh on his nomination to be Chairman of the Federal Reserve. I have known Kevin for years and his exemplary record speaks for itself. No one is better suited to steer the Fed and refocus our central bank on its core statutory mandate. I look forward to voting for his confirmation in short order, and watching him succeed. An outstanding choice by @realDonaldTrump!”
Sen. Cynthia Lummis: “Now more than ever, we need a Federal Reserve that embraces digital assets and financial innovation, not one that shuns advancement. I applaud President Trump’s decision and look forward to hearing Kevin Warsh’s plans to undertake needed reforms to make the Fed more transparent and accountable to Congress.”
Sen. Roger Marshall: “Kevin Warsh is an outstanding choice by President @realDonaldTrump to serve as the next Fed chair. His experience and expertise are exactly what our country needs right now. Time to unleash the full strength of the American economy.”
Sen. Dave McCormick: “I applaud President Trump’s nomination of Kevin Warsh to be Chairman of the Federal Reserve. Kevin has been a friend and colleague to Dina and me for almost 30 years. He is exactly who we need to fulfill the Fed’s mandate of monetary policy that keeps inflation in check while unlocking growth, new jobs, and opportunity. Pennsylvanians can be confident that this choice will bring common sense and steady leadership to the Federal Reserve.”
Sen. Bernie Moreno: “Phenomenal choice by President Trump! Kevin Warsh is a brilliant mind who will restore independence to the Federal Reserve. Unlike Powell, Kevin will make decisions based on logic and not based on politics. I look forward to voting to confirm him as the next Chairman!”
Sen. Pete Ricketts: “Congrats to Kevin Warsh on his nomination to be the next chairman of the Federal Reserve. I look forward to speaking with him about his vision of the Fed on @BankingGOP in the near future.”
Sen. Rick Scott: “Kevin Warsh is a great pick from @POTUS as the next @FederalReserve Chair, and I’m excited to vote for his confirmation ASAP. The Fed has lost its way. I believe Kevin understands the need to reduce the balance sheet and rein in out-of-control spending at the Fed to help get our country back on track.”
Sen. Tommy Tuberville: “Congratulations to Kevin Warsh who will do a great job as the next Chairman of the Federal Reserve. The President made an excellent choice. Time to cut rates.”
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney: “Kevin Warsh is a fantastic choice to lead the world’s most important central bank at this crucial time.”
The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board: “Does Kevin Warsh know what he’s getting into as President Trump’s nominee to be the next Chairman of the Federal Reserve? Yes, he does, which is only one of the reasons he is the right choice for a central bank that needs reform after a generation of exceeding its proper monetary remit… This is President Trump’s best second-term appointment.”
Mortgage Bankers Association President and CEO Bob Broeksmit: “MBA congratulates Kevin Warsh on his nomination to serve as Chairman of the Federal Reserve. His prior service on the Federal Reserve Board, where he developed a reputation as a prudent, thoughtful voice on monetary policy, paired with his private sector experience, will be invaluable as he leads the Federal Reserve in what has become an increasingly challenging and complicated mission.”
U.S. Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Suzanne P. Clark: “Kevin is well known to the business community. We appreciate his years of focus on how we grow the American economy and maintain stable prices for America’s families, and look forward to his confirmation process.”
JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon: “Kevin Warsh is a highly respected and experienced leader — across government, business and education — who I have seen act with integrity and a dedication to making our country better.”
Rene M. Kern Practice Professor at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania Mohamed A. El-Erian: “Congratulations to Kevin Warsh on being nominated by President Donald Trump as the next Chair of the Federal Reserve, the world’s most powerful central bank. Having observed and interacted with Kevin during his prior tenure as Fed Governor, in academia, and as a fellow member of the Group of Thirty (G-30), I believe he brings a strong mix of deep expertise, broad experience, and sharp communication skills. His commitment to reforming and modernizing the Fed bodes well for enhancing policy effectiveness and protecting the institution’s political independence.”
Financial Services Forum President and CEO Amanda Eversole: “The Federal Reserve is critical to ensuring the economic success of our nation—Kevin Warsh is the right man for the job of chair. Warsh brings an unmatched wealth of experience and has a proven track record of guiding our nation’s economy through financial crisis and recovery. President Trump understands the need for strong leadership at the Federal Reserve to fulfill its dual mandate while modernizing the institution. The Forum applauds President Trump’s nomination and looks forward to working with Warsh to ensure our nation’s economic strength for the benefit of all Americans.”
National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett: “President Trump made a great choice… I really have high regard for Kevin and we’re going to put every effort that we have into getting him confirmed as soon as possible so that we can get the Fed moving in the right direction.”
Consumer Bankers Association President and CEO Lindsey Johnson: “On behalf of America’s leading Main Street banks, we congratulate Kevin Warsh on his nomination to serve as Chair of the Federal Reserve. Mr. Warsh’s depth of expertise and understanding of the Federal Reserve’s dual mandate will be critical as the central bank navigates a complex economic environment and works to maintain stability, confidence, and long-term growth. We look forward to working with Mr. Warsh and policymakers to advance sound, predictable policies that support a strong economy, a resilient financial system, and broad access to credit for consumers and small businesses nationwide.”
American Bankers Association President and CEO Rob Nichols: “Congratulations to Kevin Warsh on his nomination to serve as the next chair of the Federal Reserve Board. In selecting Warsh, President Trump has chosen an experienced and tested policymaker who previously served at the Fed during one of its most challenging moments. Having worked alongside him in the Bush administration, I know he has a deep understanding of monetary policy, markets and the important role the nation’s banks play in the economy. We look forward to learning more about his current policy views during the confirmation process, and ultimately seeing a smooth transition in Fed leadership.”
Job Creators Network CEO Alfredo Ortiz: “Kevin Warsh is the perfect choice to lead the Federal Reserve. He has repeatedly demonstrated understanding of the true driver of inflation: excessive government money printing, not economic growth. Under his leadership, the Fed can finally reach its target inflation rate, something Chairman Powell has continually failed to do, while also expanding access to credit for small businesses. By protecting the value of the dollar, supporting economic growth, and boosting capital access, a Warsh chairmanship can backstop a booming small business economy. The Senate should quickly confirm him.”
Investment Company Institute President and CEO Eric J. Pan: “ICI offers our warm congratulations to Kevin Warsh on his selection to lead the Federal Reserve. Warsh’s wealth of experience in monetary policy and financial regulation, along with his deep understanding of the Federal Reserve’s dual mandate, will serve him well in this position. His unique background as a former Federal Reserve Governor, twinned with his experience in global financial markets, means he has a firm foundation from which to step into this leadership role. We commend President Trump for this outstanding nomination and look forward to working with Warsh to support the millions of American investors we serve.”
CRE Finance Council President and CEO Lisa Pendergast: “CREFC congratulates Kevin Warsh on his nomination to lead the Federal Reserve. As a former Federal Reserve Governor with deep experience in financial markets, Mr. Warsh brings valuable perspective at a critical moment for the U.S. economy. Federal Reserve policy has a direct and significant impact on commercial real estate finance, influencing interest rates, liquidity, and the availability of capital across CRE lending and securitization markets. Strong, transparent leadership at the Fed is essential to maintaining market stability and supporting economic growth. We look forward to engaging with Mr. Warsh and policymakers throughout the confirmation process and beyond to advance policies that promote a healthy, resilient commercial real estate finance system.”
Independent Community Bankers of America President and CEO Rebeca Romero Rainey: “ICBA and the nation’s community banks congratulate Kevin Warsh on his nomination to serve as chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. As a previous member of the Fed board, Warsh has demonstrated a clear understanding of the important role of community banks in the nation’s economy and the need for tiered regulations to support access to banking services in local communities. ICBA encourages policymakers in Washington to continue ongoing efforts to address excessive regulatory burdens on community banks and ensure a level regulatory playing field between banks and nonbank entities to support a secure environment for consumers and the financial system. We look forward to continuing to work closely with Warsh, the Trump administration, and the 119th Congress on these issues.”
Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice: “Congratulations to my close friend and trusted colleague of many years at Hoover on being nominated as the next Fed Chair. Kevin is a dedicated public servant with the intellect, experience, and judgment to lead the Federal Reserve. He understands the central bank’s key role for the United States and our allies around the world. We will benefit from his steady, principled leadership.”
Apollo Global Management Chief Economist Torsten Slok: “He will be really a great Fed Chair because the issue is that he understands the institution. He understands that this is a committee; there are 12 voting members. He absolutely also understands the importance of guiding the committee and figuring out the consensus opinion.”
UPS CEO Carol B. Tomé: “Since joining the UPS Board more than 13 years ago, Kevin Warsh has served as a trusted advisor and colleague. His deep financial markets knowledge, global economic insight, crisis management expertise, and sound judgment have made him an invaluable member of our Board. On behalf of our more than 400,000 employees, we celebrate his nomination and his willingness to serve our country in this key role.”
Chevron CEO Mike Wirth: “The energy sector stands at an inflection point. Energy abundance is a national imperative, AI leadership requires unprecedented power, and geopolitics are reshaping the energy map. Having known Kevin Warsh for decades, he’s uniquely prepared — in judgment, experience, and temperament — to serve our country at this critical time.”
House Majority Leader Steve Scalise: “Kevin Warsh is an excellent pick to serve as the next Chair of the Federal Reserve. His extensive experience makes him well qualified for the role and with Kevin as Chairman, I’m hopeful the Fed can help America’s economy continue to get back on track and restore accountability and greater trust in the institution.”
House Majority Whip Tom Emmer: “Kevin Warsh is another outstanding pick by @POTUS. I hope to sit down with him soon to discuss the importance of maintaining America’s status as the crypto capital of the world and look forward to his swift confirmation in the Senate.”
House Republican Conference Chairwoman Lisa McClain: “President Trump has made a great choice in nominating Kevin Warsh to lead the Federal Reserve! As a former Fed governor, Mr. Warsh has the right experience and deep market expertise. I look forward to his confirmation.”
Rep. Jodey Arrington: “Kevin Warsh is the right man for the job. Kevin is a longtime friend and former White House colleague—one of the smartest and most talented people I have ever served with. Kevin is a conservative economist, financial markets expert, and respected authority on fiscal, monetary, and economic policy. Kevin is a strong leader with deep convictions for free people, free markets, and fiscal responsibility. He has questioned the Fed’s recent failures, criticized the Fed’s overreach of the past, and rightfully admonished the Fed’s complicity in the explosion of our national debt. He has dedicated his career to serving our great country and advancing the principles that made America the most powerful and prosperous nation in human history.”
Rep. Andy Barr: “President Trump has hit another grand slam home run with his nomination of @kev_warsh to serve as the next Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. Over the years, Kevin has advised me and other members of the @FinancialCmte on monetary policy, interest rates, the economy and the proper role of the Fed. His advice has always been thoughtful, insightful and well-supported. Kevin and I have also connected over the years through our mutual love for the great sport of thoroughbred horseracing. Kevin’s powerful intellect, deep experience as a former Fed Board Governor, and strong background in finance and academia will serve him well in this very important position. He will do great things. Congratulations, Kevin!”
Rep. Vince Fong: “I’d like to congratulate Stanford’s Hoover Distinguished Visiting Fellow Kevin Warsh on his nomination to serve as Chairman of the @federalreserve. A former Fed Governor, Kevin brings steady leadership, deep monetary policy experience, and a strong commitment to reform. @POTUS made a great choice — Kevin understands the challenges facing hardworking Americans and how to keep our economy strong.”
Rep. French Hill: “With his service as member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, combined with his decades of academic and financial market experience, Kevin Warsh brings a clear understanding of the responsibilities of the Fed, and I congratulate him on his nomination. He has demonstrated a commitment to fighting inflation and to keeping prices in check for American families and am pleased that President Trump put forward such a qualified nominee.”
Rep. Ashley Hinson: “Excellent news, Mr. President. Congratulations to Kevin Warsh on receiving this nomination to become the next Chairman of the Federal Reserve. Iowans will greatly benefit from his expertise and strong leadership. I look forward to seeing him bring the Federal Reserve back to its core mission to help usher in economic prosperity for all Americans.”
Rep. Bill Huizenga: “I have known and interacted with Kevin Warsh for years. He played a pivotal role in navigating our country through one of the greatest financial crises in our lifetime. Kevin is incredibly qualified and immediately provides credibility as well as stability to this important role.”
Rep. Mike Lawler: “Congratulations to New York native Kevin Warsh on being appointed as Fed Chair! He will do a phenomenal job! Having served on the Federal Reserve under President Bush and at the height of the financial collapse in 2008, he is well prepared to handle these challenging times.”
Rep. Frank Lucas: “Kevin Warsh is the right pick for Fed Chair. Having previously served on the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors, Mr. Warsh has seen firsthand how to build consensus during times of crisis, both at the Board and the FOMC. As an expert economist, Mr. Warsh will work well with Vice Chair Bowman on the work she’s already begun in right-sizing bank regulation and ensuring capital access across the country. Mr. Warsh’s work at the Fed, in the private sector, and in the executive branch, make him more than qualified to lead the Board as our banking industry undergoes tremendous innovation. As Chairman of the Task Force on Monetary Policy, Treasury Market Resilience, and Economic Prosperity, I look forward to working alongside him to bolster the American economy.”
Rep. Dan Meuser: “@POTUS made an excellent choice in Kevin Warsh to lead the @federalreserve, after months of vetting incredible candidates including Kevin Hassett, Chris Waller, and Rick Rieder. Warsh is a serious, credible choice who understands the magnitude of the job ahead — Fed policy directly affects mortgage rates, borrowing costs, and the price of everyday goods. President Trump has been clear about his priorities: lowering costs, fighting inflation, and restoring affordability, especially in the housing market. Kevin Warsh shares that focus and understands that you don’t fix the economy by crushing it. You restore stability with disciplined monetary policy that supports growth rather than working against it. With experience at the Fed, in the White House, and in the private sector, Kevin Warsh understands how monetary policy impacts real people, real businesses, and long-term economic strength. The Senate should move quickly to confirm him so the Fed can refocus on its core mission and focus on helping our economy grow to the benefit of all Americans.”
Rep. María Elvira Salazar: “Congratulations to my friend @kev_warsh on his appointment as Chairman of the Federal Reserve. Kevin is exceptionally qualified, experienced, and respected, and I am confident his leadership will strengthen our economy and restore trust in our financial system.”
Rep. Jason Smith: “I congratulate my friend, Kevin Warsh, being nominated to be the next Chairman of the Federal Reserve. Kevin has extensive experience with monetary policy, and I have no doubt that President Trump’s great selection will understand the struggles of hardworking Americans and implement policies to ensure our economy is working for them.”
Rep. Elise Stefanik: “This is a very smart nomination by President Trump of Kevin Warsh as Fed Chair. Kevin is a longtime friend and he is a fellow Upstate NY native. He is exactly the right leader at this time to right the ship at the Fed and get our economy back on track for the hardworking families and small businesses across America.”
Rep. Marlin Stutzman: “Kevin Warsh’s nomination as Fed Chair is a PIVOTAL step to unleashing the America First economy. He has decades of market experience, and has already demonstrated his commitment to FIGHTING inflation and keeping prices in check for American families. @POTUS has picked an extremely qualified nominee!”
Rep. Ann Wagner: “Kevin Warsh is fully qualified to serve as Chairman of the Federal Reserve, and his decades of experience will serve him well as he works to ensure American families have confidence in a stable economy. President Trump made an excellent decision to nominate Kevin, and I know he will be a thoughtful steward of his responsibilities as Chair as we all work to fight inflation and support strong economic growth for our nation.”
Rep. Roger Williams: “Congratulations to Kevin Warsh on his nomination to serve as Federal Reserve Chair. As a Member of the @FinancialCmte and Chairman of @HouseSmallBiz, I look forward to working together to advance policies that strengthen economic opportunity for every American.”
