Proud Boys Leader Has a Terrifying Plan for His Future

An ex-incarcerated organizer of the far-right Proud Boys has lofty aspirations for his future.

In an interview with Newsmax’s Greg Kelly, Proud Boy leader Enrique Tarrio pitched a run for office, boasting that he had already elevated himself from prison to Mar-a-Lago in a span of two weeks.

“Last time I was on, I told you that I was gonna take some time, and I was going to really think about what I was going to do,” said Tarrio. “And I think my future is in politics. I think I’m gonna take a serious look at running for office at some point in 2026 or 2028, and I believe that there is a path for that because it is my passion.”

Tarrio then went on to say that he had made up his mind to run for office, though he wasn’t sure exactly what office that would be.

“Is it gonna be local? Is it gonna be at a federal level? I don’t know, but I will tell you that I have made a decision,” he said.

Tarrio received a 22-year prison sentence for seditious conspiracy charges over his role in the January 6 attack.

In 2021, a federal prosecutor, an FBI agent, and Tarrio’s own lawyer described Tarrio as an informant for local and federal law enforcement, helping authorities nab “more than a dozen people in various cases involving drugs, gambling and human smuggling” before he was arrested in 2012, according to Reuters.

In an interview with the network after Trump pardoned Tarrio alongside 1,500 other January 6 rioters, Tarrio said he was “jubilant.” Trump’s spontaneous decision to legally forgive his most ardent and violent supporters overrode his administration’s internal debate on the issue and amounted to little more than a “fuck it” moment for the president, according to a White House adviser who spoke with Axios.

Two weeks ago, in an interview with Alex Jones, Tarrio promised “retribution” against people who worked on prosecuting January 6 cases.

“We’ve got to do everything in our power to make sure that the next four years sets us up for the next 100 years,” he said.

Senate Democrats stayed on the chamber floor all night Wednesday to protest the nomination of Russell Vought, an architect of Project 2025, to chair the Office of Management and Budget.

The Senate invoked cloture Wednesday afternoon with a vote of 53–47, a party-line split. In response, Democrats decided not to yield any of their allotted 30 hours of debate time, and kept the floor occupied through the night, scheduling speakers one after another.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer delivered a last-minute plea to his Republican colleagues, urging them to oppose Vought’s nomination.

“Maybe somehow you’ll realize how damaging Russell Vought is. Maybe you’ll say to yourselves, despite the fact that you might have President Trump angry with me, you’re doing the best thing for him by voting down Russell Vought ultimately, politically. Maybe. Unlikely. Forlorn hope. I always try to be an optimist. But maybe,” he said.

Senator Andy Kim of New Jersey posted on X shortly before 1 a.m. to say that he’d be taking one of the late-night shifts.

“Just got back to the Capitol past midnight as I prepare to speak during an all night marathon session to control the Senate floor and keep the focus on this assault on our Constitution,” he wrote. “We have to raise the alarm to the American people.

Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy said his “voice was shot” after his speaking shift.

“Just finished 3 hours of speaking on the floor—I took the 2-5am shift in Democrats’ effort to hold the floor all night in protest over OMB nominee Russel Vought,” he wrote on X.

Despite the Democrats’ efforts, Vought will likely be confirmed at 7 p.m. Thursday.

Last week, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee boycotted a meeting to advance Vought’s nomination over the OMB’s effort to “illegally freeze trillions of dollars” for federal funding for grants and loans, which seemed born from Vought’s intention to use “impoundment” to allow the president to pause, or even outright refuse to spend, the full amount of federally mandated funding that Congress has appropriated.

The U.S. Department of Education chose to kindly let employees know that Donald Trump’s “buyout” offer for federal employees, should they accept it, may be yanked away from them at any moment.

Last week, the president announced that he’d be giving federal workers the option of full-time in-office work or quitting with a buyout and severance pay through September 30. This is a key strategy in his effort to completely transform the federal government’s bureaucratic apparatus.

However, three Department of Education officials told NBC News on Wednesday that there were some massive caveats to this policy. The department’s new chief of staff, Rachel Oglesby, and Jacqueline Clay, its chief human capital officer, told employees that the secretary of education could nullify the agreement or the government could simply stop paying, as employees would waive their right to legal claims if they take the buyout deal. Employees have until Thursday to make a decision.

“It sounded like a commercial for a used car dealership, like, ‘Act now, one day only,’” one department official who was at the meeting said.

The Department of Education and the Office of Personnel Management, the agency responsible for managing federal employees, has pushed back with a memo that claims to assure the government’s accountability on payments. That memo includes a sample agreement that gives the “sole discretion” to waive the buyout to the “agency head” and “waives all rights to challenge the resignation before the Merit Systems Protection Board or any other forum.” More than 40,000 of the two million–plus federal government employees have accepted the buyout as of Wednesday.

Donald Trump is continuing to push his crazy plan for the United States to take over Gaza, even after the idea was soundly rejected by world leaders. In a post on Truth Social Thursday morning, the president said the “Gaza Strip would be turned over to the United States by Israel at the conclusion of fighting.”

“The Palestinians, people like Chuck Schumer, would have already been resettled in far safer and more beautiful communities, with new and modern homes, in the region,” Trump said, showing his true regard for the Palestinians by using them to insult the Senate minority leader.

“They would actually have a chance to be happy, safe, and free. The U.S., working with great development teams from all over the World, would slowly and carefully begin the construction of what would become one of the greatest and most spectacular developments of its kind on Earth. No soldiers by the U.S. would be needed! Stability for the region would reign!!!” Trump’s post said.

The post flies in the face of White House officials’ attempt to clarify Trump’s harebrained idea, which he first mentioned during a joint press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday evening. Press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters Wednesday that Trump only intended to “temporarily” transfer the 2.1 million Palestinians in Gaza to neighboring countries, such Egypt and Jordan.

The “greatest development teams from all over the world” Trump referred to in his post presumably would be real estate developers, as opposed to humanitarian organizations who help displaced people rebuild their lives and homes. The president is trying to end America’s humanitarian initiatives by trying to close the U.S. Agency for International Development, and his son-in-law Jared Kushner is a real estate developer who sees Gaza’s destruction as an opportunity for profit.

While Trump promises not to use any U.S. troops to transfer Gaza’s population, sending Israeli troops to do the job would reignite the conflict, which continues to simmer despite a more than two-week-old ceasefire. Palestinians have universally rejected the plan, as have America’s Arab allies, who presumably would be taking them in. How, then, does Trump intend to carry out his scheme?

Donald Trump wants CBS to do more than pay the price for conducting a sit-down interview with Kamala Harris before Election Day.

Since the interview aired in September, the president has insisted that the network had selectively edited Harris’s answers to a question regarding Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—a detail made all the more confusing since CBS’s 60 Minutes and Face the Nation cut and aired different portions of her answer on different days.

“CBS and 60 Minutes defrauded the public by doing something which has never, to this extent, been seen before,” Trump posted on Truth Social early Thursday. “They 100% removed Kamala’s horrible election changing answers to questions, and replaced them with completely different, and far better, answers, taken from another part of the interview.”

CBS has maintained that the interview with the Democratic presidential candidate was only edited for time but that both clips were cut from the same extended answer to the question.

Trump sued the network for $10 billion after the interview, claiming that the different clips were tantamount to “election interference” and merited CBS losing its broadcast license. Trump also argued, at the time, that Harris should drop out of the presidential race over the GOP-baked scandal.

After a review of the interview, the Federal Communications Commission released a transcript Wednesday revealing that the two answers were in fact cut from the same cloth and had both been provided by the former vice president during an extended 21-second response.

Anna Gomez, a Democratic commissioner on the FCC, said that the raw footage of the interview provided “no evidence” that CBS violated broadcasting guidelines.

“Having now seen these materials, I see no reason to continue pursuing this investigation,” Gomez said in a statement. “The FCC should now move to dismiss this fishing expedition to avoid further politicizing our enforcement actions.”

Still, the company’s apparent innocence is backdropped by a decision from Paramount, its parent company, to pursue a settlement with Trump as it rushes to close a merger with SkyDance. Trump’s new Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr has said that the editing controversy would “likely arise” in his review of the deal.

“Each excerpt reflects the substance of the vice president’s answer,” 60 Minutes said in a statement Wednesday. “As the full transcript shows, we edited the interview to ensure that as much of the vice president’s answers to 60 Minutes’ many questions were included in our original broadcast while fairly representing those answers. 60 Minutes’ hard-hitting questions of the vice president speak for themselves.”