We aim to be a voice in the ongoing political discourse, providing both factual information and opinionated analysis, from a progressive or center-left perspective, free from the direct influence of major established Main Street Media.
Blue Press Journal – In the 2024 presidentail election candidate Trump frequently characterized, President Joe Biden, as experiencing decline, a shift in this narrative is now evident. Following a recent New York Times article published on November 25th, which delved into questions surrounding President Trump’s current health and stamina, the conversation has intensified.
The article, authored by reporters Katie Rogers and Dylan Freedman, critically examines President Trump’s recent public appearances. According to sources within the political commentary arena, including a statement attributed to Sargent, the New York Times article “discusses how Trump appears to be dozing off at events, how his travel frequency has considerably diminished, and how he is seen in public less often. Furthermore, most of his events are scheduled between 12 noon and 5 PM, indicating that at the age of 79, he may struggle to maintain his previous pace.” The report also includes a “brutal video embedded in the piece that portrays him as exhausted and disoriented.”
This coverage has sparked considerable debate and raised questions regarding the implications of age and health of the president’s capacity to engage effectively in demanding public roles. The stark contrast between past criticisms leveled at President Biden and the current observations regarding President Trump’s perceived stamina and public engagement has become a focal point for many analysts and the public alike.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is facing a potential challenge to his leadership as Republican dissenters aim to use a rare procedural mechanism, known as a discharge petition, to force legislation onto the House floor. The move could create a political firestorm in the coming weeks, as Johnson seeks to unify a divided caucus ahead of critical votes on key issues.
The discharge petition, which requires 218 signatures, has been used successfully by Republicans and Democrats to bypass Johnson’s leadership. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) plans to introduce a discharge petition to force a vote on a bipartisan bill banning lawmakers, their spouses, and dependent children from owning individual stocks. The bill, introduced by Reps. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and Seth Magaziner (D-R.I.), has 101 co-sponsors, including 21 Republicans.
Johnson had fervently advocated for the ban on lawmakers trading individual stocks, yet stifling the discharge petition may unleash a wave of profound backlash. Meanwhile, Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) is rallying for another ground-breaking discharge petition to ignite a vote on crucial bipartisan legislation aimed at imposing sanctions on the very countries complicit in fueling Russia’s devastating war against Ukraine.
The use of discharge petitions has gained momentum under Johnson’s leadership due to the razor-thin GOP majority, empowering rank-and-file members frustrated with legislative roadblocks. Democrats are also using this tactic, as seen in Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine) securing 218 signatures on a discharge petition to restore union rights for federal workers. With some Republicans signing the petition, Johnson faces pressure from both sides of the aisle.
The potential challenges to Johnson’s leadership come at a critical time, as the House is set to vote on key issues tied to President Trump’s agenda, including a national defense policy bill and government funding measures. Johnson must navigate these challenges to maintain unity within his caucus and push forward with the Republican agenda. The outcome of these discharge petitions will be closely watched, as they could have significant implications for Johnson’s leadership and the legislative priorities of the House.
Blue Press Journal (NY) – The 2025 midterm elections are in the books, and Democrats are emerging with a renewed sense of optimism. In New York, the party’s electoral gains were nothing short of remarkable, with Democrats posting significant wins across suburbs, rural counties, and small towns. The results are a wake-up call for Republicans, who are likely to find the path to statewide victory in 2026 increasingly challenging.
As Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, noted, “The fact that we were able to make gains in so many areas of the state is a testament to the hard work of our candidates and the concerns of voters who are looking for a change.” The concerns of voters, she added, were driven by economic uncertainty exacerbated by President Donald Trump’s policies.
A closer examination of the election results reveals the depth of Democratic gains. In Oswego County, which Trump won by 27 points in 2024, Democrats gained five seats in the county legislature. Similarly, in Ulster County, Democrats made significant inroads in traditionally Republican towns, winning their largest majority in county history. Across the state, Democrats made gains in at least 18 different county legislative bodies, flipping over 50 seats.
The trend was not limited to county legislatures. Democrats also made significant gains in mayoral races, with the party winning mayoral offices in each of the state’s five largest cities for only the second time since 1989. In Syracuse, Sharon Owens became the first Democrat elected mayor in 12 years, while in Buffalo, Sean Ryan received the most votes in a contested mayoral race since 1981.
“We are thrilled with the results, which demonstrate that our message is resonating with voters across the state,” said Letitia James, New York State Attorney General. “The fact that we are making gains in areas that have traditionally been Republican is a sign that our efforts to address the concerns of voters are paying off.”
The implications of these results are significant. For Republicans to win a statewide victory in 2026, they will need to run up the numbers in red parts of the state, do well in suburban towns, and minimize the Democratic margin in New York City. However, this November, none of those conditions were met. As a result, Democrats are entering the 2026 elections with a renewed sense of confidence and a strong foundation for future success.
As Tom Suozzi, a Democratic Congressman from New York, noted, “The results of this election demonstrate that our party is on the right track. We are addressing the concerns of voters, and we are making gains in areas that have traditionally been challenging for us.” With the 2026 elections on the horizon, Democrats in New York are poised to continue their momentum, driven by a message that is resonating with voters across the state.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has confirmed the emergence of a new influenza A strain, specifically the K subclade of the H3N2 subtype, which currently accounts for most H3N2 infections. Historically, H3N2 has been associated with higher rates of hospitalizations and deaths among older adults compared to other influenza strains. Public health experts warn that this winter could see a particularly severe flu season, especially if vaccination coverage remains low. Influenza A generally causes more severe illness than influenza B, increasing the likelihood of hospitalization.
Flu symptoms typically develop rapidly and can range from mild to severe, with common presentations including fever, cough, sore throat, nasal congestion, muscle aches, headaches, and fatigue. The CDC advises individuals experiencing breathing difficulties, severe pain, weakness, or non-improving symptoms to seek urgent care. Vulnerable populations, such as young children and older adults, may require prompt medical attention to avoid complications.
Preliminary data from the United Kingdom indicate that this season’s flu vaccines offer at least partial protection against the new strain. Even when not perfectly matched, vaccines can provide cross-protection, reducing illness severity and hospitalization risk. Nevertheless, experts express greater concern over declining vaccination rates, particularly among children, than over the degree of strain-vaccine match. Medical professionals emphasize that while the vaccine is not flawless, it is effective in preventing severe outcomes, intensive care admissions, and deaths.
As of mid-November, overall flu activity in the United States remains low, with Louisiana reporting moderate levels and states such as Colorado and Mississippi experiencing slight increases. Most infections to date have been reported in children. Data collection has been partially delayed by the federal government shutdown and the Thanksgiving holiday. Although current national infection rates are not unusually high, flu activity typically peaks between December and February, suggesting a potential surge in the near future. Experts anticipate increased spread as the season progresses, underscoring the importance of vaccination as a preventive measure.
60 percent of Americans disapprove of the job Trump’s doing
Blue Press Journal – A new Gallup poll released on Friday has revealed a dismal picture for President Donald Trump, with his approval rating sinking to 36 percent, just one point higher than its lowest point since taking office. The poll, which comes as Trump nears the midpoint of his term, shows that 60 percent of Americans disapprove of the job he’s doing, a stark reminder that his policies and actions are facing intense scrutiny from the public.
Trump’s numbers have been underwhelming since his return to the Oval Office in January, with his approval rating stuck between 40 percent and 41 percent in the intervening months. The latest poll suggests that his policies on immigration and the economy, two key areas he’s focused on, are not resonating with voters. His approval rating on these issues stands at 37 percent and 36 percent, respectively, while his handling of healthcare policy has earned a meager 30 percent approval rating.
The pollsters noted that Trump’s standing with the American people has been damaged by the longest shutdown of the federal government, Republican Party losses in the 2025 elections, and concerns about affordability. The combined effect of these factors “could be a sign of trouble for Republicans in next year’s midterm elections,” Gallup warned, as the GOP tries to maintain control of the federal government.
Trump’s response to criticism has been to lash out at the press, exemplified by his bizarre outburst earlier this month when he told an ABC News reporter to “Quiet, piggy” while she asked about the Justice Department’s release of files related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. This behavior only adds to the perception that Trump is out of touch with the concerns of ordinary Americans.
As the midterm elections draw near, Trump’s plummeting approval rating and the GOP’s mounting electoral defeats are transforming into an undeniable burden for the party. The signs are unmistakable: Trump’s policies and outrageous behavior are failing to connect with the electorate, and it is high time for Republicans to engage in a serious introspection about their path forward.
Blue Press Journal – In recent remarks, President Donald Trump, a draft doger, criticized Senator Mark Kelly, a retired U.S. Navy combat pilot and NASA astronaut, for stating in a video that military personnel are trained not to follow illegal orders. While public figures are subject to scrutiny, misrepresenting a fundamental principle of military ethics for political gain undermines both national values and public understanding of military duty.
Senator Kelly’s statement echoes long-standing U.S. military doctrine: service members take an oath to support and defend the Constitution, not to blindly obey commands. This principle has been affirmed in military training, legal precedents, and historical events—from the Nuremberg Trials to modern-day operational guidelines. The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) clearly establishes that obeying unlawful orders does not absolve individuals of responsibility for their actions.
By framing Kelly’s accurate and responsible comments as unpatriotic or subversive, the critique distorts a cornerstone of American civil-military relations. The U.S. Armed Forces instill not only discipline but also moral and legal accountability. Soldiers, sailors, and officers are expected to exercise judgment when confronted with directives that violate the law or the Constitution. This safeguard protects both service members and democratic governance.
Attacking a decorated veteran for reiterating accepted military protocol does a disservice to the brave men and women who serve. It risks eroding public trust in the professionalism and integrity of the armed forces. More importantly, it conflates lawful dissent and ethical duty with disloyalty—dangerous rhetoric in a democracy.
Military service demands courage, sacrifice, and an unwavering commitment to the rule of law. Mark Kelly’s career exemplifies these values. To suggest otherwise not only misrepresents the facts but also diminishes the standards to which all Americans should hold their leaders—civilian and military alike. In upholding the principle that no one is above the law, Senator Kelly speaks not just as a veteran, but as a steward of democratic integrity.
Donald J. Trump has leveraged his brand, his political apparatus, and even the vestiges of his former office to amass unprecedented personal wealth. But even as the public eye focuses on multi-million dollar deals involving crypto tokens and foreign entities, a deeper and perhaps more cynical mechanism of self-enrichment continues unabated: the direct funneling of Republican donor money into his own cash registers via the political committees he controls.
A recent analysis of Federal Election Commission (FEC) data reveals a stark pattern of political spending being used primarily to prop up the former president’s private businesses, confirming the suspicion that for Trump, the political process is a profoundly effective business model.
In the 10 months since he returned to the spotlight following his exit from office, Trump’s hotels and country clubs have collected approximately $1.1 million from Republican candidates and committees. Crucially, nearly four-fifths of that sum—a staggering $857,246—originated from entities that Trump himself dictates and manages.
Leading the charge is the Republican National Committee (RNC), which has poured at least $796,513 into Trump properties. Additionally, MAGA Inc., Trump’s primary Super PAC, added $60,733 to that tally. In effect, major GOP fundraising engines, fueled by grassroots donations meant to elect Republicans nationwide, are instead serving as the former president’s captive clients.
Grifting in Plain Sight
This highly formalized process of self-dealing, which converts political contributions into corporate revenue, has drawn sharp rebuke from ethics watchdogs.
Jordan Libowitz, head of communications for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), highlighted the significance of these continuous smaller drains on donor funds. “When Trump rakes in tens of millions of dollars from crypto deals, it’s easy to miss when he grifts hundreds of thousands of dollars from his political apparatus, but those numbers add up,” Libowitz stated. “Ask an average American if they think pocketing $800,000 is a big deal or chump change.”
The transparency of the transaction is perhaps the most audacious element. Campaign funds, gathered under the banner of political necessity, are being used to pay for overhead, events, and stays at resorts that perpetually carry the Trump name—a move that virtually guarantees the highest possible margin of profit for the owner. There is no competitive bidding process, only the implicit mandate that political activity supporting Trump must also financially benefit him.
Algorithms of Loyalty
This continuous revenue stream relies on the unshakeable loyalty of Trump’s base and the strategic effectiveness of his fundraising machine.
One anonymous GOP consultant familiar with the operation confirmed that the success is highly systematic, driven not by fresh political messaging, but by refined methods aimed at dedicated followers. “It is all algorithms that are paying off,” the consultant noted, suggesting that the committees are exploiting established formulas and scripts that reliably drain small-dollar donations, which are then routed to the Trump Organization.
A Pattern of Monetizing Power
This dedicated use of political committees as profit centers fits seamlessly into Trump’s broader, aggressive strategy of monetizing the influence derived from his public life.
The funneling of nearly $860,000 in committee funds is merely the tip of an ice-cold pattern of financial opportunism. Trump recently used the imprimatur of the White House—which he occupied years ago—to stage a dinner honoring the largest purchasers of his deeply controversial crypto “meme” coins.
Furthermore, his willingness to use taxpayer funds to promote his private interests is well-documented. Last year, he spent an estimated $10 million of taxpayer funds to speak at the grand opening of his golf course in Aberdeen, Scotland, an event the White House was inappropriately pressured to publicize.
Perhaps most troubling are the apparent quid pro quo arrangements involving foreign nations. Earlier this year, Trump reportedly solicited a $400 million luxury Boeing 747 from Qatar for temporary use as Air Force 1 before it is supposedly handed over to his presidential library. This request came only after Qatar was granted significant military concessions, including permission to use an Air Force Base in Idaho and a powerful, NATO-like security guarantee should the nation be attacked.
Make Tump Rich Again (MTRA)
These combined strategies—from using committees to pay exorbitant hotel fees to soliciting massive gifts from countries receiving favorable foreign policy treatment—paint a clear picture: Donald Trump views the political sphere less as a venue for public service and more as the ultimate vehicle for personal, unrestricted wealth accumulation. The political apparatus that donors assume is working to secure victory for the Republican cause is, in reality, ensuring the financial security of one man’s private empire.
BLUE PRESS JOURNAL – The Trump administration’s tenure has been marked by a relentless pursuit of retribution against perceived political opponents, a campaign promise that has become a defining characteristic of his governance. A thorough Reuters analysis has revealed that at least 470 individuals, organizations, and institutions have been targeted, averaging over one target per day, either by name or as part of broader purges. This systematic approach to punishment has raised concerns about the erosion of norms in US governance and the weaponization of executive power.
The administration’s actions have taken various forms, including punitive measures such as firings and suspensions, threats of investigations and penalties, and coercion to force organizations to roll back diversity initiatives. At least 36 orders have been issued, targeting over 100 individuals and entities with punitive actions. The firing of prosecutors who investigated Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election, penalizing media organizations and law firms tied to opponents, and sidelining civil servants who questioned his policies are stark examples of this retribution.
However, the Trump administration disputes the notion that it is driven by a desire for revenge, instead framing its actions as necessary to enforce the electoral mandate and hold individuals accountable for wrongdoing. This justification, however, is contested by experts who argue that the scale and systematic nature of Trump’s retribution efforts represent a significant departure from long-standing norms in US governance. The parallels drawn to former President Richard Nixon’s quest for vengeance are particularly striking, highlighting the alarming implications of Trump’s actions.
Many of Trump’s targets have challenged their punishments as illegal, filing administrative appeals or legal challenges claiming wrongful termination. While these actions have been cheered by Trump’s staunchest backers, who view them as a necessary response to perceived injustices against Trump, they raise serious concerns about the rule of law and the independence of institutions.
The Trump administration’s retribution efforts have significant implications for the US governance system. By wielding executive power to punish perceived foes, the administration is undermining the principles of accountability and transparency that underpin democratic governance. The systematic nature of these efforts suggests a calculated attempt to intimidate and silence opponents, rather than a legitimate effort to enforce the law.
The Trump administration’s pursuit of retribution against perceived political opponents is a troubling trend that threatens the foundations of US democracy. As the administration continues to wield executive power to punish its foes, it is imperative that the courts and other institutions remain vigilant in defending the rule of law and upholding the principles of accountability and transparency.
BLUE PRESS JOURNAL – The special election in Tennessee’s 7th Congressional District, initially considered a safe Republican seat after Donald Trump won it by over 22% in 2024, has unexpectedly become intensely competitive. Both Republicans and Democrats are heavily investing funds, with Republicans fearing that Trump’s current unpopularity and the off-year timing could lead to an upset loss for their candidate, Matt Van Epps, against Democrat Aftyn Behn.
This tightening race aligns with a national trend where Democrats have consistently overperformed in special elections since Trump’s return to office. Recognizing the severe implications, Donald Trump has personally intervened, urging his supporters to vote for Van Epps.
The outcome of this election carries serious consequences for the Republican Party’s narrow majority in the U.S. House of Representatives. A loss for Van Epps would reduce the GOP’s majority to a bare minimum of 218 seats. With the impending resignation of Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene in January, the party could potentially lose its majority altogether before the 2026 midterms. Internally, there is growing discontent among House Republicans towards Speaker Mike Johnson for his unwavering defense of Trump, with some predicting more resignations and even Johnson losing his gavel due to low morale. Regardless of the final result, a close contest in a historically safe Republican district like Tennessee’s 7th is a grim indicator for the GOP’s prospects in the 2026 midterms, signaling potential widespread losses if they struggle to defend such seats.
BLUE PRESS JOURNAL – In a stinging legal defeat for Donald Trump, a federal appeals court on Monday upheld nearly $1 million in sanctions against the former president and his lawyer, Alina Habba, for filing a lawsuit that it deemed a frivolous and politically motivated abuse of the judicial system.
The original suit, which ballooned to 193 pages, alleged a vast conspiracy to undermine Trump’s 2016 campaign with false Russia collusion claims. It was dismissed last year by a district court judge as a “political manifesto” lacking any legal merit.
In its 36-page decision, the three-judge appellate panel found that the lawsuit was built on “tenuous links” and recycled debunked conspiracy theories. The court heavily criticized the lack of legal diligence, quoting the lower court’s finding that the complaint “advanced legal theories foreclosed by precedent ‘that the most basic legal research would have revealed.’”
The appeals court was particularly critical of the fact that Trump and Habba abandoned the majority of their own arguments when appealing the sanctions.
“Trump leaves all these frivolous claims behind, making a total of 11 of his 16 claims he does not appeal,” the court wrote. “Trump and Habba give us no reason to reverse the district court’s ruling that these claims were frivolous.”
The decision solidifies a significant financial penalty aimed at deterring the use of courts for political retribution. It marks a legal setback for Trump and highlights the unprofessional and meritless tactics of his team, condemned by two levels of the federal judiciary. The ruling serves as a warning to those who might weaponize the legal system for political grievances.
Blue Press Journal 