Officials in Oregon have filed a lawsuit seeking to block the Trump administration from deploying National Guard troops in Portland, adding to the legal battles against President Trump’s use of troops in major cities.
The state of Oregon and city of Portland filed a joint lawsuit Sunday against Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem over the deployment of the National Guard to the Beaver State’s biggest city.
The lawsuit, filed in federal court, calls the deployment of National Guard troops to Portland “heavy-handed” and unlawful.
The president, in a post on his Truth Social platform Saturday morning, directed Hegseth to “provide all necessary Troops” to deploy to Portland. The move stems from protests outside an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in the city, with Trump claiming the building was “under siege from attack by Antifa, and other domestic terrorists.”
The court filing, though, argued the protests have involved fewer than 30 people in recent weeks and noted no arrests have been made since mid-June.
“Defendants’ heavyhanded deployment of troops threatens to escalate tensions and stokes new unrest, meaning more of the Plaintiffs’ law enforcement resources will be spent responding to the predictable consequences of Defendants’ action,” the lawsuit states.
Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek (D), appearing at a press conference alongside state Attorney General Dan Rayfield (D) and Portland Mayor Keith Wilson (D), called the deployment “an abuse of power and a disservice to our communities and our service members,” according to KOIN in Portland.
Kotek also marched with residents in downtown Portland on Sunday, saying in a post on the social platform X that “we don’t need military intervention here.”
As governor, Kotek controls her state’s National Guard. The lawsuit alleges Trump does not have the authority to seize control of the Oregon National Guard under Title 10, Section 12406 of the U.S. Code, which gives the president the capacity to federalize state national guards if the country is facing an invasion or rebellion or the president “is unable with the regular forces to execute the law.”
The lawsuit also says Trump’s order violates the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states that authority not delegated to the federal government is reserved for states. It also says the move violates the Posse Comitatus Act, which bars federal troops from being used for civilian law enforcement.
“Defendants have thus infringed on Oregon’s sovereign power to manage its own law enforcement activity and National Guard resource,” the lawsuit says. “Far from promoting public safety, Defendants’ provocative and arbitrary actions threaten to undermine public safety by inciting a public outcry.”
White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson told The Hill that the president’s actions were “lawful” and would “make Portland safer.”
“President Trump is using his lawful authority to direct the National Guard to protect federal assets and personnel in Portland following months of violent riots where officers have been assaulted and doxxed by left-wing rioters,” she said.
The Pentagon declined to comment on the lawsuit. The Hill has also reached out to the Department of Homeland Security for comment.
President Donald Trump on Sunday called for an end to an “epidemic of violence” across the United States following a shooting that left casualties at a Mormon church in Michigan, calling it a “targeted attack” against Christians.
Trump said in a post on Truth Social that he was “briefed on the horrendous shooting” and that the FBI was “immediately” on the scene after the shooting.
“This appears to be yet another targeted attack on Christians in the United States of America,” Trump wrote in the post. “The Trump Administration will keep the Public posted, as we always do. In the meantime, PRAY for the victims, and their families.”
The president added in all caps that “this epidemic of violence in our country must end, immediately.”
Trump appeared to reference recent high-profile shootings, including a mass shooting at a Catholic church last month, the assassination of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk earlier this month, and a shooting that left one person dead at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) building in Dallas several days ago. A shooting at a North Carolina marina on Saturday night also left three people dead and eight others injured.
Hundreds of people were inside The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Grand Blanc Township when a 40-year-old man rammed his vehicle into the front door, exited the vehicle, and started shooting, Police Chief William Renye told reporters in a news conference.
The suspect is believed to have also set the church on fire, Renye said. Flames and smoke could be seen for hours before the blaze was put out. First responders were then seen sifting through the wreckage.
“We do believe we will find some additional victims once we find the area where the fire was,” Renye said.
The suspect used an assault rifle in the shooting, Renye said.
An assault rifle generally refers to a select-fire, fully automatic rifle. Machine guns were effectively banned in a 1986 measure called the Firearm Owners Protection Act, only allowing machine guns that were made before 1986 available to civilians and generally making them rare and expensive to obtain.
Police said they did not yet have a motive for the fire or shooting. The church, encircled by a parking lot and a large lawn, is located near residential areas and a Jehovah’s Witness hall.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, also known as the Mormons, said that Sunday’s shooting left “multiple individuals” injured in a “tragic act of violence.”
“The Church is in communication with local law enforcement as the investigation continues and as we receive updates on the condition of those affected,” the statement from church spokesperson Doug Andersen reads. “We offer thanks to the emergency responders who are assisting victims and families.”
“Places of worship are meant to be sanctuaries of peacemaking, prayer and connection,” Andersen added.
Other officials at the state and federal level issued a statement in the wake of the shooting, including FBI Director Kash Patel and Attorney General Pam Bondi.
Patel, who said that FBI officials are currently responding to the shooting, wrote in a post on X that “violence in a place of worship is a cowardly and criminal act” and added that “our prayers are with the victims and their families during this terrible tragedy.”
“Such violence at a place of worship is heartbreaking and chilling,” Bondi wrote. “Please join me in praying for the victims of this terrible tragedy.” She added that she has been receiving briefings on the incident.
Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer said in a statement that she was grateful to the first responders who arrived on the scene and said that violence at place of worship “is unacceptable.”
GRAND BLANC TOWNSHIP, Mich. — A gunman rammed his pickup truck through the front doors of a Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints chapel during Sunday services, opened fire on worshippers with an assault rifle, and deliberately set the building ablaze, killing at least four people and injuring eight others, authorities said. The suspect, identified as 40-year-old Thomas Jacob Sanford of nearby Burton, Michigan, was fatally shot by police in the church parking lot minutes after the attack began.
The rampage, which unfolded around 10:25 a.m. local time on September 28, 2025, at the chapel in Grand Blanc Township—a suburb of Flint about 60 miles northwest of Detroit—left hundreds of congregants, including families and children, in terror as flames engulfed the sanctuary. Officers responded within 30 seconds of the first 911 call and neutralized Sanford by 10:33 a.m., according to Grand Blanc Township Police Chief William Renye. “A 40-year-old suspect from Burton drove his vehicle through the front doors of the church,” Renye said at an evening press conference. “He then exited his vehicle, firing several rounds.”
The church, surrounded by a large parking lot and residential neighborhoods, was packed with around 150 to 200 worshippers for the weekly service—one of the largest congregations in the area. Eyewitnesses described chaos as the assailant, driving a four-door pickup adorned with two American flags in the bed, crashed into the entrance before emerging to unleash gunfire. Investigators believe Sanford then intentionally ignited the blaze, which quickly spread, forcing evacuations and complicating rescue efforts. “The entire church is on fire,” Genesee County Sheriff Chris Swanson told reporters at the scene. “This is a dynamic scene.” Firefighters battled heavy smoke and flames for hours, with the building suffering extensive damage.
As of Sunday evening, authorities confirmed four deaths—two from gunshot wounds and two whose causes remain under investigation, potentially linked to the fire—and eight injuries, including one victim in critical condition and seven in stable condition. Officials warned that the toll could rise as search teams comb the charred structure for additional victims. Reunification centers were established at a nearby theater and off-site locations to help families locate loved ones.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has taken the lead in the probe, classifying the incident as “an act of targeted violence.” Reuben Coleman, acting special agent in charge of the FBI’s Detroit field office, announced that more than 100 agents were en route, joined by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. “I can confirm at this time that the FBI is now leading the investigation,” Coleman said. No motive has been publicly disclosed, but the rapid response by local officers—a Department of Natural Resources officer and a township police officer—likely prevented further casualties.
The attack struck just one day after the death of Russell M. Nelson, the 101-year-old president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints—commonly known as the Mormon church—prompting an outpouring of grief from the faith’s 16 million global members, about 2% of whom live in the U.S., per Pew Research. The church, founded in the early 19th century, issued a statement calling the violence “a tragic act of worship.” “Places of worship are meant to be sanctuaries of peacemaking, prayer and connection,” it read. “We pray for peace and healing for all involved.” Under church protocol, Dallin H. Oaks is expected to succeed Nelson as president.
This tragedy adds to a grim tally of violence at U.S. houses of worship, marking the 324th mass shooting of 2025 according to the Gun Violence Archive. It comes just weeks after a mid-Mass shooting in Minneapolis that killed two children and a June incident at another Michigan church. Community members, like 19-year-old missionary Justin Jensen, who frequented the chapel, expressed shock: “The fact that it’s happening at a church just blew my mind.” Timothy Jones, 48, whose family attends a nearby ward, noted his children had been at a youth event there the night before.
Grand Blanc Township, with a population of about 40,000 surrounding the smaller city of 8,000, is reeling from the assault on its tight-knit community. As investigators sift through the wreckage, residents gathered in prayer vigils, grappling with the violation of a sacred space. The FBI’s ongoing probe will seek answers on Sanford’s motives, but for now, the focus remains on supporting survivors and honoring the fallen in a place meant for solace.
In a bold and aggressive move that underscores Beijing’s relentless ambition to dominate the Indo-Pacific, Chinese President Xi Jinping is reportedly maneuvering to extract a major concession from President Donald Trump: a formal U.S. declaration opposing Taiwan’s independence. This push, revealed in recent reports, exploits Trump’s focus on securing a robust trade deal with China, potentially at the expense of America’s longstanding commitment to the democratic island nation that stands as a bulwark against communist expansionism.
Xi, who has made “reunification” with Taiwan a cornerstone of his authoritarian “China Dream” since seizing power in 2012, sees the upcoming high-stakes meetings with Trump as his golden window to erode U.S. support for Taipei. According to sources familiar with the matter, Beijing has urged the Trump administration to shift from the Biden-era phrasing that the U.S. “does not support” Taiwan independence to a stronger stance explicitly “opposing” it – a semantic change with profound implications that could embolden China’s military adventurism and undermine Taiwan’s sovereignty. This would mark a diplomatic triumph for Xi, aligning Washington more closely with Beijing’s narrative that Taiwan is a breakaway province destined for absorption, by force if necessary.
The Trump administration has yet to decide on this demand, which sits amid a laundry list of Chinese asks under review. But conservatives in Washington are sounding the alarm, warning that any capitulation would signal weakness and betray America’s allies. Former National Security Advisor John Bolton blasted the idea on X, stating, “Recent reports confirm Xi Jinping is going to leverage trade negotiations with Trump to push the U.S. to abandon our position on Taiwan independence. This is exactly what I warned against last week.” Bolton’s concerns echo his earlier criticism of the administration’s decision to withhold over $400 million in military aid to Taiwan this summer amid trade talks, a move that raised eyebrows about prioritizing economic deals over deterring Chinese aggression.
Trump, known for his art-of-the-deal negotiating style, has so far played his cards close, avoiding explicit commitments to defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion to preserve leverage. In August, he revealed that Xi had assured him China would not invade during his presidency, adding cryptically, “China is very patient.” Yet, recent actions – including denying Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te a routine U.S. transit stop and delaying arms deliveries – have fueled speculation that trade priorities might be overshadowing security pledges, prompting unease in both Washington and Taipei.
The U.S. maintains its “One China” policy, acknowledging Beijing’s claims without endorsing them, and emphasizes opposition to any unilateral changes to the status quo across the Taiwan Strait. A State Department spokesperson reiterated to reporters, “We have long stated that we oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo from either side. China presents the single greatest threat to peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait.” This stance was bolstered earlier this year when the department removed Biden-era language explicitly not supporting independence, a tweak praised by Taiwan but met with fury from Beijing.
Xi’s strategy is clear: capitalize on Trump’s desire for a trade win following the recent TikTok agreement, which kept the app operating in the U.S. under American ownership. The leaders have a slate of engagements lined up, including a face-to-face at next month’s Asia-Pacific economic summit in South Korea, Trump’s potential visit to Beijing in early 2026 – a diplomatic coup for Xi – and Xi’s reciprocal trip to the White House later that year, contingent on progress on trade and fentanyl curbs.
Experts warn this is classic Chinese Communist Party tactics: incremental gains to erode U.S. resolve. Evan Medeiros, a former U.S. national security official, told reporters, “Driving a wedge between Washington and Taipei is the holy grail of the Taiwan problem for Beijing. It would undermine Taiwan’s confidence and increase Beijing’s leverage over Taipei.” Yun Sun of the Stimson Center added, “No U.S. policy change on Taiwan will happen overnight. But China will push persistently to inch forward – and in the process, undermine Taiwan’s confidence in U.S. commitment.”
From Taiwan’s vantage point, these developments are alarming but not insurmountable. A senior Taiwanese national security official, speaking anonymously, dismissed Beijing’s ploy: “China’s attempts to exploit political transitions in the US to create a ‘strategic gap’ would not succeed, as they disregard Washington’s established strategic policy on Taiwan.” Taiwan’s Foreign Minister Lin Chia-lung recently appealed for U.N. recognition of Taiwan’s sovereignty, arguing it’s time for the world to “leave no one behind” by embracing Taiwan’s contributions. Taipei remains confident in its U.S. ties, viewing a strong Taiwan as essential to Indo-Pacific stability.
Meanwhile, China’s military saber-rattling intensifies. Beijing has ramped up war games in the Taiwan Strait, claiming jurisdiction over the 110-mile waterway. Leaked documents reveal Moscow is aiding Xi’s preparations, agreeing to train Chinese paratroopers and supply vehicles for a potential aerial assault, with Western intelligence estimating Beijing could be invasion-ready by 2027. Chinese Embassy spokesman Liu Pengyu stonewalled inquiries, reiterating, “China firmly opposes any form of official exchanges or military ties” between the U.S. and Taiwan.
Right-leaning voices argue this is no time for concessions. Trump, who championed America First policies, should stand firm against Xi’s coercion, prioritizing deterrence over deals that could embolden a regime hell-bent on regional hegemony. As Bolton warned, trading away Taiwan’s security for short-term economic gains risks long-term catastrophe, echoing the appeasement pitfalls of the past. With global stocks rising amid bets on U.S. rate cuts, the real stakes are geopolitical: Will America hold the line against communist aggression, or blink in the face of Beijing’s bluster?
WASHINGTON — In a significant blow to President Donald Trump’s efforts to reshape the Federal Reserve, a federal appeals court on Monday night rejected the administration’s emergency bid to remove Governor Lisa Cook from the central bank’s Board of Governors, upholding a lower court’s temporary block on her termination. The 2-1 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ensures that Cook, the first Black woman to serve as a Fed governor, can participate in this week’s crucial Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting, where policymakers are widely expected to vote on a quarter-point cut to the federal funds rate amid signs of a cooling labor market.
The ruling comes at a pivotal moment for the U.S. economy, as the Fed grapples with inflation pressures exacerbated by Trump’s tariff policies and a weakening job market. Cook, appointed by President Joe Biden in 2022 and reappointed in 2023 for a term extending to January 2038, launched her legal challenge on August 28 after Trump fired her on August 25. The dismissal was based on allegations from Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Director Bill Pulte that Cook made false claims on mortgage applications in 2021—prior to her Senate confirmation—potentially securing more favorable loan terms by misrepresenting properties in Michigan, Georgia, and Massachusetts as primary residences.
U.S. District Judge Jia M. Cobb had granted Cook’s request for a preliminary injunction on September 9, finding that the removal likely violated the Federal Reserve Act’s “for cause” provision and her Fifth Amendment due process rights. Cobb noted that the allegations, which predate Cook’s tenure, did not constitute sufficient grounds for dismissal, describing them as raising “many serious questions of first impression.” Documents reviewed by Reuters indicate that Cook declared a Georgia property as a vacation home, not a primary residence, undercutting Pulte’s claims, while Michigan property tax authorities confirmed no rules were broken on a home she listed as primary.
The Trump administration swiftly appealed, arguing in briefs that the president has broad discretion to remove Fed governors for cause, including pre-office conduct that reflects a “lack of care in financial matters” inconsistent with public trust. Lawyers for the White House contended that courts should not second-guess such decisions, warning that blocking the removal would “diminish” the Fed’s integrity. They sought an emergency stay to oust Cook before the FOMC’s two-day meeting starting Tuesday, emphasizing the need to ensure governors are “competent and capable of projecting confidence into markets.”
Cook’s legal team fired back in a Saturday filing, urging the appeals court to deny the stay and highlighting the broader implications for Fed independence. “A stay by this court would therefore be the first signal from the courts that our system of government is no longer able to guarantee the independence of the Federal Reserve,” her attorneys argued, warning that it could allow the president to fire board members on “flimsy pretexts,” ending the era of central bank autonomy and risking dire economic consequences. They stressed that the government provided no meaningful notice or opportunity for Cook to respond to the allegations, a point the appeals court majority echoed in its order.
In the majority opinion, joined by Circuit Judge J. Michelle Childs—both Biden appointees—Circuit Judge Bradley N. Garcia wrote that Cook’s due process claim is “very likely meritorious,” as the administration “does not dispute that it provided Cook no meaningful notice or opportunity to respond.” The judges reasoned that granting the stay would “upend, not preserve,” the status quo, given Cook’s continuous service, and that her strong likelihood of success on the merits warranted denial. Circuit Judge Gregory G. Katsas, a Trump appointee, dissented, arguing the “equitable balance” favored the government due to the heightened interest in ensuring Fed competence.
White House spokesman Kush Desai responded defiantly Tuesday morning, stating to Barron’s that “The President lawfully removed Lisa Cook for cause. The Administration will appeal this decision and looks forward to ultimate victory on the issue.” The administration has until hours before the FOMC meeting to seek emergency relief from the U.S. Supreme Court, a path it has signaled it will pursue. This marks the first attempted “for cause” removal of a Fed governor in the central bank’s 111-year history, testing long-standing protections against political interference enshrined in the 1913 Federal Reserve Act, which shields governors from at-will dismissal but does not define “for cause” or removal procedures.
The case underscores Trump’s aggressive push to influence monetary policy, including public berating of Fed Chair Jerome Powell for not cutting rates aggressively enough despite inflation concerns. The Fed has held rates steady since late 2024 but signaled a potential cut last month amid hiring weakness; economists now anticipate a reduction to about 4.1%, which could lower borrowing costs for mortgages, auto loans, and businesses over time. Cook’s lawyers noted she has continued her duties during the litigation, and the Fed itself has remained neutral, requesting a swift resolution and pledging to abide by court orders.
Complicating matters, the Senate narrowly confirmed Trump’s nominee Stephen Miran—current chair of the Council of Economic Advisers—to a vacated Fed board seat on Monday night in a 48-47 party-line vote, meaning he will also join this week’s meeting. Miran’s addition could tilt the board toward Trump’s preferences, but Cook’s retention preserves a Biden-era voice in deliberations.
Beyond the immediate rate decision, the dispute has ramifications for the Fed’s independence, seen as essential for controlling inflation and stabilizing markets. The Supreme Court, in a May ruling on other agency removals, distinguished the Fed as a “uniquely structured, quasi-private entity” with singular historical traditions, potentially bolstering Cook’s position. Meanwhile, the Justice Department has launched a criminal mortgage fraud probe into Cook, issuing grand jury subpoenas in Georgia and Michigan, though no charges have been filed and Cook denies wrongdoing, calling the allegations a pretext for her policy stances.
As the legal battle escalates, markets await the FOMC’s outcome, with investors eyeing how this high-stakes clash might influence the central bank’s credibility and the broader economy under Trump’s second term.
In a bold move that’s got the liberal media establishment shaking in their boots, President Donald Trump unleashed a staggering $15 billion defamation lawsuit against The New York Times and publisher Penguin Random House on September 15, 2025, calling out years of what he describes as vicious, fabricated attacks designed to derail his America First agenda and sabotage the 2024 election.
This isn’t just another legal skirmish—it’s a full-frontal assault on the fake news machine that’s spent decades smearing Trump, his family, his businesses, and the patriotic movements like MAGA that have reshaped American politics. And despite a Florida judge’s temporary dismissal on technical grounds last Friday, Trump is already declaring victory, vowing to refile and hold these biased outlets accountable once and for all.
The suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Tampa, Florida, zeroes in on three hit-piece articles from the Times—including a pre-election editorial branding Trump “unfit for office”—and the 2024 smear-job book Lucky Loser: How Donald Trump Squandered His Father’s Fortune and Created the Illusion of Success, cooked up by Times reporters Russ Buettner and Susanne Craig and peddled by Penguin. Trump’s lawyers argue these publications are riddled with “repugnant distortions and fabrications,” maliciously aimed at tanking his reputation and inflicting billions in damage to his brand and future earnings.
In a fiery Truth Social post, Trump blasted the Times as “one of the worst and most degenerate newspapers in the History of our Country,” accusing it of becoming a “virtual mouthpiece for the Radical Left Democrat Party” and labeling their Kamala Harris endorsement as “the single largest illegal Campaign contribution, EVER.”
Make no mistake: This lawsuit exposes the deep-seated hatred the elite media harbors for Trump and everything he stands for. The complaint lays out how the Times operated with “actual malice,” knowingly pushing lies because their reporters couldn’t stand the sight of a successful businessman-turned-president who puts America first. It’s no secret the Times has been gunning for Trump since day one, and this book—masquerading as journalism—is just the latest in a long line of partisan hacks.As detailed in the filing, Lucky Loser peddles tired tropes about Trump’s inheritance and success, ignoring his undeniable track record of building empires and winning elections against all odds.
But the deep state sympathizers in the judiciary tried to throw a wrench in the works. On September 19, Judge Steven Merryday—a Bush-era appointee—tossed the 85-page complaint, calling it “decidedly improper and impermissible” for including too much “vituperation and invective” and self-praise for Trump’s accomplishments. Merryday griped that lawsuits aren’t “a megaphone for public relations” or a “podium for a passionate oration at a political rally,” but let’s be real: Trump’s filing was a necessary takedown of the media’s lies, and the judge’s nitpicking on length smells like another attempt to protect the establishment press. Still, in a huge win for Trump, Merryday greenlit a refiling within 28 days, limited to 40 pages—plenty of room to sharpen the knife and go after these defamers again.
Trump, ever the fighter, brushed off the dismissal like the minor speed bump it is. During an Oval Office event, when ABC’s Jonathan Karl tried to gloat over the ruling, Trump shot back: “I’m winning, I’m winning the cases.” He then turned the tables, slamming ABC as a “terrible network” and Karl as “guilty” of unfair reporting. And he’s right—Trump’s racking up victories left and right. Just look at his July $10 billion suit against The Wall Street Journal over bogus Epstein smears, or the fat settlements he extracted from CBS ($16 million for deceptively editing a Kamala Harris interview) and ABC ($15 million over George Stephanopoulos’ false rape claims tied to E. Jean Carroll). These aren’t flukes; they’re proof that when Trump fights back, the fake news folds.
The Times, predictably, whined that the suit is “an attempt to stifle and discourage independent reporting,” while Penguin called it “meritless.” But “independent“? Give us a break. This is the same rag that’s been a Democrat cheerleader for years, pushing hoaxes from Russia collusion to COVID fearmongering. A Pew survey earlier this year showed Republicans overwhelmingly agree the media’s been too critical of Trump, while Dems think he’s too hard on them—classic liberal bias.
As of September 24, 2025, Trump’s team is gearing up to refile, with a spokesman affirming: “President Trump will continue to hold the Fake News accountable through this powerhouse lawsuit.” On X, supporters are rallying, with posts slamming the Times as a “mouthpiece” and cheering Trump’s stand against media tyranny. This fight isn’t just about one man—it’s about restoring truth in journalism and protecting conservative voices from the left’s smear machine. Trump’s not backing down, and neither should we. MAGA forever.
“We were all blessed to know Mary Rose Oakar — a highly gifted, indefatigable, extraordinary woman of deep faith. Mary Rose was elected to Congress from inside the working class of people. She exhibited raw courage, loyalty, perseverance, high learning, precious humor, and stellar insight into human nature. Her hearty laugh elevated people’s spirits. She suffered no fools,” the statement said. “She not only stood her ground but made her own ground — to serve senior citizens, housing, pay equity, and better health care for women, moving into the ranks of Democratic House leaders where she firmly stood as Vice Chair of the Democratic Caucus.”
According to the statement, Oakar was the first Arab American woman, Syrian-American and Lebanese-American to serve in Congress.
“She dedicated endless hours and years to build new bridges toward peace in the Middle East, and understanding of its complexity for communities here at home,” Kaptur said.
“Mary Rose worked hard to promote an economy that serves everyone, across Northern Ohio, and throughout our nation. Her abilities sparkled as she brought joy, wit, keen insight, kindness, and dynamism to every occasion. I am grateful for her abiding friendship and counsel, which she generously shared. She was one of a kind,” the statement concluded. “Holding all of her family, friends, and her community in Cleveland in prayer. She truly loved them with all her heart and soul.“
Provo, Utah – In a stark affirmation of justice for one of America’s brightest conservative voices, Utah prosecutors laid out a damning case against Tyler James Robinson on Tuesday, charging the 22-year-old radical leftist with aggravated murder in the cold-blooded assassination of Charlie Kirk. With seven felony counts on the table—including obstruction of justice and witness tampering—authorities announced their intent to pursue the death penalty, a fitting end for the monster whose hatred-fueled plot ended the life of the 31-year-old Turning Point USA co-founder. This isn’t just a prosecution; it’s a declaration of war against the violent extremism festering in leftist online cesspools that radicalized Robinson into a killer.
Kirk, a devoted husband, father of two, and unyielding champion of American values, was gunned down last Wednesday afternoon at a packed Turning Point USA event on the Utah Valley University campus in Orem. Speaking to over 3,000 supporters about mass shootings—ironically, including those tied to trans ideology—Kirk was struck in the neck by a single sniper shot from a rooftop perch about 150 yards away. The graphic footage that went viral captured the horror as pandemonium erupted, but Kirk’s final words, defending freedom and truth, echoed as a testament to his unbreakable spirit.
President Trump, who called Kirk “like a son” and credited him with mobilizing young voters, hailed the charges as a step toward “real justice,” vowing that such attacks on conservatives won’t go unpunished in his America First era.
Robinson, a third-year electrical apprentice from St. George, Utah, faces the full weight of the law after a 33-hour manhunt ended when his own father recognized him from surveillance photos and convinced the coward to turn himself in. Held without bail in Utah County Jail since Friday, the suspect’s digital trail paints a picture of obsession and ideological poison. Court documents reveal a chilling handwritten note found under a keyboard at his apartment: “I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk, and I’m going to take it.” Text messages to his live-in boyfriend—a biological male in the process of transitioning—show Robinson confessing in real time after the shooting: “I’ve had enough of his hatred.
Some hate can’t be negotiated out.” He admitted planning the hit for over a week, even engraving unspent shell casings with pro-trans and anti-fascist slogans, like a twisted manifesto of woke rage.
Utah County Attorney Jeff Gray, in a riveting press conference, detailed the evidence tying Robinson to the crime: DNA on the trigger of the bolt-action Mauser .30-06 rifle recovered in nearby woods; palm and shoe prints at the scene; and messages on Discord where Robinson allegedly admitted, “Hey guys, I have bad news for you all…It was me at UVU yesterday. im sorry for all of this.” Gray didn’t mince words, calling the killing “an American tragedy” and Kirk “first and foremost a husband and father.” He emphasized aggravating factors: the political targeting of Kirk and the presence of children among the witnesses, including Kirk’s own kids in the crowd. “I do not take this decision lightly,” Gray said of seeking death, “but it’s based solely on the evidence and the nature of this heinous crime.” Under Utah law, aggravated murder qualifies for execution—by lethal injection or, if drugs are unavailable, firing squad—a poetic justice for a sniper who ambushed a patriot.
Robinson’s radicalization, authorities say, was a rapid descent into leftist lunacy. Once a straight-A Mormon kid from a seemingly normal family, he veered hard left in the past year, influenced heavily by his trans boyfriend and online echo chambers. His mother warned family of his shift toward pro-gay, pro-trans views, sparking tensions in their MAGA-leaning household—his dad a die-hard Trump supporter. Family gatherings revealed Robinson’s growing disdain for Kirk, with one relative recounting a dinner chat where he ranted about the activist’s “hate.” FBI Co-Deputy Director Dan Bongino, on Fox News, described “multiple warning signs,” including coworkers noting Robinson’s detachment on politics and his “obsession” with Kirk via digital footprints. Bongino hinted at family and friends who might have seen the storm brewing but stayed silent.
The plot thickens with the FBI’s probe into an “extended network” that may have aided and abetted this monster. Bongino told Fox’s “America’s Newsroom” that agents are issuing subpoenas to uncover if anyone—from pro-trans Steam gaming groups to the now-deleted Armed Queers SLC Instagram page—had foreknowledge or provided support, even financial. They’re scrutinizing the TikTokker who questioned Kirk on trans mass shooters right before the shot, wondering if it was a diversion. At a Senate Judiciary hearing Tuesday, FBI Director Kash Patel revealed Robinson’s Discord chat had far more than 20 participants: “We’re running them all down,” he said, investigating “anyone and everyone” for complicity. Patel cited a text where Robinson boasted of his “opportunity” to kill Kirk over “hatred for what Charlie stood for,” and a destroyed note with similar threats—though the bureau has forensic evidence of its contents. President Trump, in an Oval Office briefing, nailed it: Robinson was “radicalized over the internet… on the left,” a product of the toxic sludge from Biden-era tolerance of extremism.
This assassination isn’t isolated—it’s the latest in a surge of left-wing violence, from Trump’s near-misses to the Minnesota lawmaker slaying. Vice President JD Vance blamed “left-wing extremism,” while Gov. Spencer Cox called Robinson “deeply indoctrinated with leftist ideology,” despite no party registration. The roommate, cooperating fully, handed over the incriminating texts and note, stunned by the confession: “You were the one who did it, right?” Robinson’s reply: “I am. I’m sorry.” He even fretted about retrieving his grandpa’s rifle—left in a towel in the bushes—and explaining its loss to his dad.
Robinson’s virtual arraignment is set for 5 p.m. ET Tuesday in Utah County Justice Court. Federal charges could follow, but state prosecutors are leading the charge for swift, severe justice. Kirk’s widow, Erika, vows to carry on his legacy, saying the “cries of this widow will echo around the world like a battle cry.” Turning Point USA plans a massive memorial at a 60,000-seat Arizona stadium. As Trump put it, “Charlie was brilliant… He didn’t deserve this.” In an America reclaiming its strength, Robinson’s date with destiny will send a message: Attack our heroes, and you’ll face the full fury of the law. No mercy for those who sow hate and reap death.
The Israeli military intensified its ground assault on Gaza City on Friday, September 19, 2025, warning residents it would deploy “unprecedented force” against Hamas fighters as tanks and airstrikes hammered the territory’s largest urban center. The escalation, which began with a major incursion on Tuesday, comes amid a fresh United Nations report accusing Israel of committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza—a finding that has drawn sharp rebukes from Israeli officials and renewed calls for international intervention nearly two years into the devastating war.
The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) issued stark evacuation orders via social media and leaflets, directing the estimated remaining population—down from about one million at the end of August—to flee southward along the coastal Al-Rashid road, the only remaining open route after the closure of the main Salah al-Din artery. “From this moment, Salah al-Din Road is closed for south-bound travel,” IDF Arabic-language spokesman Avichay Adraee posted on X, urging civilians to “take this opportunity and join the hundreds of thousands of city residents who have moved south to the humanitarian area.” The military estimates that 480,000 people have evacuated Gaza City since late August, though Gaza’s civil defense agency put the figure at 450,000 as of Friday. Many families, burdened by elderly relatives, young children, and scant belongings, described harrowing journeys on foot or in overloaded vehicles, with some resorting to carts or sleeping on streets while awaiting transport they could ill afford.
The offensive aims to dismantle Hamas’s command structure and seize control of the city, which Israel views as the group’s symbolic stronghold. IDF troops, including armored and infantry divisions, have advanced deep into neighborhoods like al-Rimal and al-Sabra, dismantling over 20 suspected militant sites in the past day alone, according to military statements. Overnight strikes and tank fire have leveled buildings and infrastructure, with witnesses reporting “hellish” barrages that shook the enclave. Gaza health officials, citing hospital tallies, reported at least 22 deaths across the Strip on Friday, including 11 in Gaza City, bringing the war’s toll to nearly 65,000 Palestinians killed since October 7, 2023.
For those heeding the warnings, escape is no salvation. Nivin Ahmed, a 50-year-old mother of seven, recounted walking more than 15 kilometers to Deir el-Balah on Thursday, her family “crawling from exhaustion” as her youngest son wept from fatigue. “We took turns dragging a small cart with some of our belongings,” she told reporters. Mona Abdel Karim, 36, has spent two nights on Al-Rashid street with her elderly in-laws and children, too weak or ill to trek further without a vehicle. “I feel like I am about to explode,” she said, highlighting the prohibitive costs of transport amid widespread poverty and famine. Footage from the road showed endless lines of pedestrians and cars piled high with mattresses and essentials, snaking toward the southern “humanitarian area” of Al-Mawasi—a zone Israel designated early in the war but has repeatedly struck, citing Hamas presence.
The push into Gaza City unfolds against a grim international backdrop. Just days earlier, on September 16, a United Nations Independent International Commission of Inquiry released a 72-page report concluding that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza, fulfilling four of the five acts outlined in the 1948 Genocide Convention: killing members of the group, causing serious bodily or mental harm, deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction, and imposing measures intended to prevent births. Chaired by former UN human rights chief Navi Pillay, the panel analyzed statements from Israeli leaders—including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, President Isaac Herzog, and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant—as direct evidence of genocidal intent, alongside patterns of conduct like starvation tactics and attacks on healthcare and fertility clinics. The report also documented “systematic” sexual and gender-based violence, direct targeting of children, and the destruction of educational and religious sites.
“The Commission concludes that the Israeli authorities and Israeli security forces have had and continue to have the genocidal intent to destroy, in whole or in part, the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip,” the inquiry stated, holding the state responsible for failing to prevent or punish the acts. It urged Israel to immediately halt operations and comply with International Court of Justice provisional measures from March 2024, while calling on all states to enforce accountability. Amnesty International echoed the findings, warning that “the very existence of Palestinians in Gaza is under threat” as the offensive intensifies.
Israel vehemently rejected the report as “distorted and false,” with Netanyahu’s office insisting the war is a legitimate defense against Hamas, which killed 1,139 Israelis and took over 200 hostages on October 7, 2023—48 of whom remain captive. The IDF maintains it takes “all feasible measures” to minimize civilian harm and accuses Hamas of using human shields. Yet critics, including the European Commission, are preparing measures to pressure Israel, with EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas set to present a plan on Wednesday for member states to reassess ties. Canada labeled the offensive “horrific,” while Hamas decried it as “unprecedented” and “barbaric.”
U.S. President Donald Trump, a staunch ally, suggested the operation could hasten hostage releases, telling reporters the risks to captives might rise but “also may be freed” in the chaos. His administration continues providing military aid, even as the UN warns of famine gripping Gaza City, with 441 deaths attributed to starvation alone. Aid groups report overwhelmed hospitals and acute malnutrition among children, half of Gaza’s displaced population.
As smoke billows over Gaza City’s skyline and families press southward under fire, the offensive raises profound questions about the war’s endgame. Israel seeks to “force an end” by crippling Hamas, but with the enclave in ruins and global outrage mounting, the path to resolution remains as elusive as safety for those caught in the crossfire.
FBI Director Kash Patel said “multiple” electronic devices were seized from the Utah home of Tyler Robinson, the man accused of fatally shooting Charlie Kirk last week, as part of the ongoing investigation.
“We are going to be interviewing scores of people, not just these chats on Discord, but any communications this individual have,” Patel said Monday evening during an appearance on Fox News’s “Hannity.”
“We’ve seized multiple electronic devices from the home of the suspect and his romantic partner,” he continued. “We’ve got computers, we’ve got laptops, gaming systems, cell phones.”
Law enforcement identified 22-year-old Robinson as the shooter who allegedly shot and killed Kirk, a conservative activist and co-founder of Turning Point USA, on Wednesday during an event at Utah Valley University.
“The evidence and information will come out. I won’t stylize the evidence, but I will say what was found in terms of information was a text message exchange where he, the suspect, specifically stated that he had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk, and he was going to do that,” the FBI director told host Sean Hannity.
On Monday, Patel, who is facing growing scrutiny over his handling of the case, said the bureau reconstructed a note from Robinson, stating the alleged suspect planned to take Kirk out.
“The suspect wrote a note saying, ‘I have the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk, and I’m going to take it.’ That note was written before the shooting. Evidence of its existence — we now have learned existed before the shooting — was in the location in the suspect and partner’s home,” Patel said Monday on “Fox and Friends.”
He said that the note was destroyed, but “we have found forensic evidence of the note, and we have confirmed what that note says, because of our aggressive interview posture at the FBI.”
The agency also collected DNA evidence from a screwdriver located at the scene and a towel used to wrap the rifle allegedly used in Kirk’s killing, according to Patel.
Over the weekend, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox (R) said Robinson was in a romantic relationship with his roommate, who is cooperating with law enforcement.
Robinson is set for his first court appearance on Tuesday. He has been arrested on suspicion of aggravated murder.
Joe Biden, the doddering architect of America’s near-collapse under socialist policies and endless scandals, is now reaping what he sowed in the form of a post-presidency that’s as bankrupt as his administration’s border strategy. Eight months after handing the White House back to a resurgent Donald Trump, Biden finds himself persona non grata among the elite circles that once propped him up. Corporate boards won’t touch him, speaking gigs are evaporating faster than his poll numbers, and donors are treating his presidential library like a toxic asset. This isn’t just bad karma; it’s a market correction on a failed leader whose unpopularity and the looming shadow of Trump’s retribution have turned “Diamond Joe” into fool’s gold.
Let’s face it: Ex-presidents typically glide into golden parachutes, cashing in on their Oval Office stint with seven-figure speaking fees, cushy board seats, and memoir deals that could fund small nations. Bill Clinton turned influence-peddling into an art form, raking in $200 million post-White House. Barack Obama? He and Michelle scored a $60 million book bonanza and Netflix gigs while hobnobbing with billionaires. Even George W. Bush paints his way to quiet millions. But Biden? At 82, battling a severe prostate cancer diagnosis that’s metastasized, he’s reduced to haggling over scraps. The Wall Street Journal lays it bare: No corporate sinecures for old Joe, thanks to his glaring cognitive decline—evident in that fateful 2024 debate that sealed his fate—and the baggage of a presidency marred by inflation, crime waves, and foreign policy blunders.
Speaking fees? Sure, he’s quoting $300,000 to $500,000 a pop, but the invites are scarce, and bookers are lowballing him like a yard sale find. Why? Fear of Trump’s wrath. With the 47th president vowing to drain the swamp deeper than ever, companies dread audits, investigations, or lost contracts if they align with the man who weaponized the DOJ against conservatives. As one insider whispered to The Journal, “Who’s going to risk it for Biden?” Instead of jet-setting on private planes—avoiding those pesky “unsavory flight logs” à la Epstein—Biden’s slumming it in coach on American Airlines or breaking Amtrak quiet car rules with his endless chatter. His Fourth of July? Holed up in a luxury trailer in Malibu, courtesy of Hunter’s pal Moby. Nice, but hardly the Hamptons elite circuit where real power brokers summer.
The real kicker is the Biden Presidential Library—or lack thereof. NBC News reports a donor drought that’s turned the project into a punchline. John Morgan, the Florida lawyer who funneled $800,000 to Biden’s doomed reelection, scoffed: “I don’t believe a library will ever be built unless it’s a bookmobile from the old days.” Another top bundler? A flat “Me? No way.” Over a dozen major Democratic funders are sitting on their wallets, blaming Biden’s ego-driven refusal to bow out gracefully, which gifted Trump a landslide. The projected $200-300 million price tag? Forget it; they’re saving for the party’s post-Biden rebuild. Contrast that with Trump’s library plans, already flush with MAGA millions and set to be a monument to American greatness in Florida.
Biden’s not destitute—far from it. His $250,600 presidential pension, plus $166,000 from Senate and VP annuities, keeps the lights on. A $10 million Hachette book deal for his memoirs will pad the nest, though it’s a pittance next to the Obamas’ haul—ego bruise alert. But obligations mount: He’s bankrolling Hunter’s post-pardon legal circus (despite the get-out-of-jail-free card, debts linger) and supporting Ashley amid her divorce woes. Then there’s the $800,000 mortgage on his Rehoboth Beach mansion, compounded by a 20% property tax spike this year. For a guy whose “lifestyle” screams modest (read: boring), these hits sting, especially as Trump’s economy booms, lifting all boats except Biden’s leaky dinghy.
This financial flop isn’t misfortune; it’s market justice. Biden’s presidency was a disaster: Skyrocketing costs from “Bidenomics,” an open border inviting chaos, and a foreign policy that emboldened adversaries from Beijing to Tehran. Voters rejected it resoundingly, and now the donor class is following suit. Trump’s shadow looms large—his promises of accountability have executives thinking twice about associating with the Biden brand, synonymous with corruption and incompetence. As the Journal notes, even universities are wary after the Penn Biden Center’s classified docs fiasco. The cold shoulder? It’s conservatives’ quiet revenge, proving that in Trump’s America, failure has consequences.
Biden’s diminished twilight serves as a cautionary tale for the left: Peddle radical agendas, ignore the will of the people, and watch your legacy evaporate. While Trump builds empires and rallies crowds, Biden fades into irrelevance, a footnote in the history of American resurgence. If he’s lucky, that bookmobile library might tour nursing homes—fitting for a president who put the nation to sleep.
WASHINGTON – FBI Director Kash Patel is bracing for a grilling from both sides of the aisle as he prepares to testify before Congress on Tuesday, September 16, 2025, amid swirling controversies over his handling of the investigation into the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk and a wave of internal firings that have plunged the bureau into turmoil.
Patel, a staunch ally of President Donald Trump confirmed in February 2025 in a razor-thin, party-line Senate vote, returns to the Senate Judiciary Committee for the first time since his January confirmation hearing. There, he pledged to Democrats that he would steer clear of retribution against perceived political enemies within the FBI. Now, with the bureau reeling from high-profile missteps and lawsuits alleging a “campaign of retribution,” Patel faces skeptical lawmakers eager to probe whether he’s lived up to those assurances.
The hearing, which will also include an appearance before the House Judiciary Committee later in the week, comes just days after the FBI’s response to Kirk’s killing on a Utah college campus last week drew sharp bipartisan criticism. Kirk, the 31-year-old founder of Turning Point USA, was shot and killed by 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, who authorities say had increasingly embraced a “leftist ideology” and become more politically radicalized in recent years. Robinson turned himself in late Saturday night, September 13, after acquaintances tipped off law enforcement, but not before Patel’s public handling of the case ignited a firestorm.
Patel drew immediate backlash for a social media post hours after the shooting, announcing that “the subject” was in custody—a claim he walked back less than two hours later, stating the individual had been released following an interview. The swift reversal fueled accusations of incompetence, with conservative commentator Chris Rufo questioning Patel’s “operational expertise” in a Friday morning post on X (formerly Twitter). “He performed terribly in the last few days, and it’s not clear whether he has the operational expertise to investigate, infiltrate, and disrupt the violent movements—of whatever ideology—that threaten the peace in the United States,” Rufo wrote.
Steve Bannon, another prominent Trump supporter, piled on, noting that those close to Robinson had turned him in, calling the arrest “not great law enforcement work.” Even President Trump, while defending Patel in a Saturday interview with Fox News Channel’s Maria Bartiromo, acknowledged the scrutiny: “Kash and the FBI have done a great job,” Trump said, but the praise rang hollow amid the GOP infighting.
Undeterred, Patel pushed back aggressively on Monday morning during an appearance on Fox & Friends. Defending his transparency pledge—a cornerstone of his vow to dismantle the “deep state” bureaucracy he inherited—Patel dismissed the criticism as partisan noise. “I was being transparent with working with the public on our findings as I had them,” he said. “I stated in that message that we had a subject and that we were going to interview him, and we did, and he was released. Could I have worded it a little better in the heat of the moment, sure, but do I regret putting it out? Absolutely not.”
He added: “I challenge anyone out there to find a director that has been more transparent.” Patel also highlighted his decision to release photographs of Robinson while he was at large, crediting it with facilitating the eventual arrest. The FBI rarely comments publicly on ongoing probes, making Patel’s approach a deliberate departure from precedent.
The Kirk investigation isn’t the only flashpoint. Democrats, led by Senate Judiciary Committee members like Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), have teed up questions about broader politicization of the bureau. Schiff posted a video on X last week previewing his line of inquiry, compiling past Patel statements critical of the “deep state.” Patel fired back swiftly: “Let’s find out who law enforcement backs… and who supports defunding the police—answer coming tomorrow, but we already know.”
On the left, concerns center on a recent FBI review of Jeffrey Epstein’s files, which culminated in a memo deeming further releases unnecessary despite earlier promises. House Judiciary ranking member Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) fired off a letter to Patel last week demanding details: “Obvious questions abound: why were so many agents tasked with reviewing documents that were never released? What specific instructions were they given during the review? What information did these agents uncover that led DOJ and FBI to reverse their promise to release the files, and how are these decisions related to the President?”
Raskin specifically asked when Patel became aware of references to Trump in the files and for a breakdown of resources devoted to the review. The Epstein matter has faded somewhat amid the Kirk fallout, but it’s expected to resurface as evidence of alleged favoritism.
Compounding the pressure is a federal lawsuit filed last week by three top FBI officials ousted in August, including former acting director Brian Driscoll. The complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, accuses Patel of orchestrating the firings as part of a White House-directed purge targeting those seen as disloyal. Driscoll, who clashed with Trump administration officials early in the president’s second term, and two other high-ranking agents allege the removals were illegal and retaliatory.
The suit details a conversation between Patel and Emil Bove, then a senior Justice Department official, in which Patel reportedly admitted the firings were non-negotiable to safeguard his position. “Patel explained that he had to fire the people his superiors told him to fire, because his ability to keep his own job depended on the removal of the agents who worked on cases involving the President,” the complaint states. It further claims Patel referenced the FBI’s past investigations into Trump, saying, “the FBI tried to put the President in jail and he hasn’t forgotten it.” Driscoll believed “superiors” meant the Justice Department and White House, a claim Patel did not refute in the recounted exchange.
White House aide Stephen Miller is named in the suit, with allegations that he demanded “summary firings” via Bove. The firings have decimated FBI leadership: Since Trump’s January 2025 inauguration, the administration has axed all top career officials overseeing key branches, multiple special agents in charge of field offices, and counterterrorism expert Mehtab Syed, who was set to lead the Salt Lake Field Office in February. Current and former officials say the upheaval has sapped morale and hampered operations at a time of rising political violence.
Democrats argue these moves echo Patel’s confirmation hearing promises gone awry, while Republicans on the committee—holding the majority—plan to rally around him. They expect to laud his emphasis on combating violent crime and illegal immigration, and press for updates on the Kirk probe, including Robinson’s motives tied to leftist extremism.
Patel’s tenure, now eight months old, has been marked by vows to root out institutional bias. A vocal critic of the multiple probes into Trump during his first term, Patel has redirected resources toward reexamining the 2016 Russia investigation into potential Trump campaign coordination. Agents and prosecutors are reportedly seeking interviews on those long-dormant threads, which Patel frames as correcting past weaponization of the FBI and DOJ.
As the hearing looms, Patel shows no signs of backing down. His combative style—evident in his X clapback at Schiff and on-air defenses—suggests Tuesday’s testimony will be as much a battle as an oversight session. For a director who campaigned on transparency and reform, the spotlight could either solidify his reformist image or expose fractures in his leadership of America’s premier law enforcement agency.
Cookie Consent
We use cookies to improve your experience on our site. By using our site, you consent to cookies.
Contains information related to marketing campaigns of the user. These are shared with Google AdWords / Google Ads when the Google Ads and Google Analytics accounts are linked together.
90 days
__utma
ID used to identify users and sessions
2 years after last activity
__utmt
Used to monitor number of Google Analytics server requests
10 minutes
__utmb
Used to distinguish new sessions and visits. This cookie is set when the GA.js javascript library is loaded and there is no existing __utmb cookie. The cookie is updated every time data is sent to the Google Analytics server.
30 minutes after last activity
__utmc
Used only with old Urchin versions of Google Analytics and not with GA.js. Was used to distinguish between new sessions and visits at the end of a session.
End of session (browser)
__utmz
Contains information about the traffic source or campaign that directed user to the website. The cookie is set when the GA.js javascript is loaded and updated when data is sent to the Google Anaytics server
6 months after last activity
__utmv
Contains custom information set by the web developer via the _setCustomVar method in Google Analytics. This cookie is updated every time new data is sent to the Google Analytics server.
2 years after last activity
__utmx
Used to determine whether a user is included in an A / B or Multivariate test.
18 months
_ga
ID used to identify users
2 years
_gali
Used by Google Analytics to determine which links on a page are being clicked
30 seconds
_ga_
ID used to identify users
2 years
_gid
ID used to identify users for 24 hours after last activity
24 hours
_gat
Used to monitor number of Google Analytics server requests when using Google Tag Manager
