Mamdani Kicked Out -He's Fuming Over This VIDEO
Mamdani Kicked Out -He's Fuming Over This VIDEO
Posted August 4, 2026Homeless Camp Near Big Tourist Spot Remains Despite Mamdani Deadline
Observers note New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani campaigned in 2025 on a platform that included expanding public services and reducing the cost of living for residents.
As his administration has begun implementing those policies, critics argue that delivering on many of those campaign promises has proven more difficult than expected.
Reports indicate one of the most visible challenges has been a large homeless encampment stretching across several blocks on Manhattan’s West Side. Observers note that despite Mamdani’s stated seven-day timeline for addressing the encampment, much of it remained in place after the deadline expired.
One resident of the encampment, Liam, 40, told the New York Post that he appreciated the mayor’s approach.
“[Mamdani] has more of the human aspect,” Liam said. “He’s taking into account people, not just clumping everyone together.”
He added, “I feel like he’s saying, ‘Would I be happy with this if it’s me on the street?'”
According to the Post, media reports note City Hall did not respond to questions about the status of the cleanup.
Reports show reporters visiting the area on Monday found that much of the encampment, extending from West 34th Street to at least West 49th Street, remained intact. Observers noted only a handful of makeshift structures had been removed, including one near the Intrepid Museum.
Sanitation workers and police officers were seen clearing portions of the area, but observers point out the cleanup appeared to be progressing gradually.
Media reports note the pace of the effort contrasts with Mamdani’s stated policy of allowing homeless outreach teams and social service workers seven days to encourage individuals living in sidewalk encampments to relocate before the New York Police Department begins enforcement.
The seven-day deadline expired Monday with only limited enforcement activity taking place, reports indicate.
Sanitation crews were observed loading clothing, mattresses, and other belongings into garbage trucks while police monitored the operation.
Reports show some people living in the encampment said their possessions had been removed, but numerous tents and makeshift shelters remained near West 44th, 47th, and 49th streets between 11th and 12th avenues.
Earlier this month, the Post reported allegations of drug activity, prostitution, and the storage of suspected stolen merchandise within parts of the encampment.
Local residents and business owners have complained that the garbage-strewn camps have created safety and quality-of-life concerns for both the surrounding neighborhood and tourists.
Critics have also argued that the NYPD was initially limited in its ability to intervene because of the administration’s approach to homeless encampments.
Last week, observers note Mamdani said the city would take action to address the encampments but did not provide a specific timetable for completing the effort.
Separately, reports earlier this month said the U.S. State Department blocked a planned meeting between a senior official in the Mamdani administration and Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations.
According to those reports, Ana María Archila, commissioner of the Mayor’s Office for International Affairs, had been scheduled to meet with Iran’s U.N. ambassador, Amir-Saeid Iravani, before the meeting was canceled.
And He’s GONE: Pro-Palestinian Agitator Mahmoud Khalil Will Be Deported to N. Africa: DHS
Pro-Palestinian activist and former Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil, who has been labeled pro-Hamas by the Trump administration, will now have to make Algeria his new home, as announced by the Department of Homeland Security on Thursday.
This development follows an appellate court ruling that has paved the way for the Syrian-born activist’s removal.
Let’s be very clear about who Mahmoud is and why his name matters.
He wasn’t some passive bystander caught up in a protest wave. Mahmoud was a key Columbia University activist and a self-styled “student negotiator” during the violent, lawless campus takeovers that erupted after the Hamas massacre of October 7, 2023.
And that’s the part the establishment media loves to glide past.
Enjoying our conservative news and commentary? Make sure you share and tell your friends about us!
After Hamas butchered civilians, slaughtered families, raped women, kidnapped children, and dragged hostages into terror tunnels, a shocking portion of America’s elite universities didn’t mourn. They celebrated.
Instead of condemning barbarism, mobs of students rushed to defend the perpetrators — hiding behind slogans about “the plight of the Palestinian people” while effectively laundering propaganda for a terrorist organization. This was open sympathy for mass murderers.
And Mahmoud wasn’t on the sidelines. He was helping organize, negotiate, and legitimize protests that shut down campuses, intimidated Jewish students, vandalized property, and openly praised the group that carried out the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust.
Let’s also dispense with another inconvenient truth the activists refuse to acknowledge: Hamas was elected. In 2006, the Palestinian electorate voted Hamas into power. Not imposed. Not seized in a coup.
Voted in.
The same Hamas that now runs Gaza as a terror state, uses civilians as human shields, fires rockets from hospitals, and builds tunnels instead of schools.
So when campus radicals tell you they’re just standing with “the people,” what they’re really doing is defending the political movement that chose jihad over coexistence.
Mahmoud wasn’t protesting for peace.
He was participating in a movement that rationalized mass murder, excused terrorism, and turned American universities into propaganda stages for Hamas. But Mahmoud will not be enjoying the freedoms of the United States any longer, according to DHS:
“It looks like he’ll go to Algeria. That’s what the thought is right now,” Tricia McLaughlin, DHS assistant secretary for public affairs, told “Katie Pavlich Tonight” when asked about Khalil.
“It’s a reminder for those who are in this country on a visa or on a green card. You are a guest in this country — act like it,” she added. “It is a privilege, not a right, to be in this country to live or to study.”
“It is a privilege, not a right.” Spot. On.
Report this article
Select a reason for reporting:
Inaccurate information Copyright violation Spam / advertisement Offensive content Other '; footer.hidden = true; overlay.hidden = false; document.body.style.overflow = 'hidden'; } function hideSection() { if (section) section.hidden = true; } function openModal() { if (alreadyReported) { showSuccess(); return; } overlay.hidden = false; document.body.style.overflow = 'hidden'; } function closeModal() { overlay.hidden = true; document.body.style.overflow = ''; footer.hidden = false; overlay.querySelectorAll('input[name="report_reason"]').forEach(function(r) { r.checked = false; }); document.getElementById('reportMessage').value = ''; errorBox.hidden = true; submitBtn.disabled = false; submitBtn.textContent = 'Submit report'; imageItems = []; imgGrid.innerHTML = ''; updateAttachBtn(); } btn.addEventListener('click', openModal); closeBtn.addEventListener('click', closeModal); cancelBtn.addEventListener('click', closeModal); overlay.addEventListener('click', function(e) { if (e.target === overlay) closeModal(); }); document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) { if (!overlay.hidden && e.key === 'Escape') closeModal(); }); // --- Error helper --- function showError(msg) { errorBox.textContent = msg; errorBox.hidden = false; } // --- Submit --- submitBtn.addEventListener('click', function() { var selected = overlay.querySelector('input[name="report_reason"]:checked'); if (!selected) { showError('Please select a reason.'); return; } errorBox.hidden = true; submitBtn.disabled = true; var itemsToUpload = imageItems.filter(function(it) { return !it.uploadedUrl; }); if (itemsToUpload.length === 0) { doSubmit(selected.value); return; } submitBtn.textContent = 'Uploading…'; var done = 0, failed = 0; itemsToUpload.forEach(function(entry) { entry.statusEl.textContent = '…'; entry.statusEl.className = 'report-img-item__status'; entry.statusEl.hidden = false; resizeImage(entry.file, MAX_LONG_PX, function(resized) { uploadFile(resized, currentSlug, function(err, url) { done++; if (err) { failed++; entry.statusEl.textContent = 'Failed'; entry.statusEl.className = 'report-img-item__status err'; } else { entry.uploadedUrl = url; entry.statusEl.textContent = '✓'; entry.statusEl.className = 'report-img-item__status done'; } if (done === itemsToUpload.length) { if (failed > 0) { showError('Could not upload ' + failed + ' image(s). Remove the failed ones (red) or submit without them.' ); submitBtn.disabled = false; submitBtn.textContent = 'Submit report'; } else { doSubmit(selected.value); } } }); }); }); }); function doSubmit(reason) { submitBtn.textContent = 'Sending…'; var uploadedUrls = imageItems .map(function(it) { return it.uploadedUrl; }) .filter(Boolean); var payload = { reason: reason, message: document.getElementById('reportMessage').value.trim(), post_slug: currentSlug, post_url: window.location.href }; if (uploadedUrls.length) payload.image_urls = uploadedUrls; fetch('/api/post-report', { method: 'POST', headers: { 'Content-Type': 'application/json', 'X-Requested-With': 'XMLHttpRequest' }, body: JSON.stringify(payload) }) .then(function(r) { return r.json(); }) .then(function(data) { if (data && data.ok) { markReported(currentSlug); alreadyReported = true; bodyEl.innerHTML = '✓ Thank you for your report.'; footer.hidden = true; setTimeout(function() { closeModal(); footer.hidden = false; hideSection(); }, 2000); } else { showError((data && data.message) ? data.message : 'Something went wrong. Please try again.'); submitBtn.disabled = false; submitBtn.textContent = 'Submit report'; } }) .catch(function() { showError('Connection failed. Please try again.'); submitBtn.disabled = false; submitBtn.textContent = 'Submit report'; }); } })();Comments 0
Posting as GuestCBS Host LOSES IT After Sen. Kennedy FACT CHECKS Her Trump LIES… THIS GOT BAD!...
CBS Host PRESSES John Kennedy on Trump’s Spending — His Answer Takes an Unexpected Turn
The interview began with some of the biggest questions facing Washington: the conflict with Iran, rising fuel costs, and the approaching midterm elections. But when Republican Senator John Kennedy appeared on Face the Nation with CBS host Margaret Brennan, the conversation quickly moved toward an issue that could shape the political debate for months to come: how the government spends taxpayers’ money.
Kennedy did not pretend that the economic pressure facing American families was insignificant. He argued that voters were far more concerned about the cost of living than the daily battles playing out on television. With oil prices affected by disruptions around the Strait of Hormuz, he said, the consequences of foreign policy were reaching directly into household budgets.
Kennedy Brings the Conversation Back to Affordability
Kennedy’s message to the White House was unusually direct. He predicted that the midterm elections would be close and argued that Republicans needed to keep their attention on the financial concerns of ordinary Americans.
“When moms and dads lie down to sleep at night and can't,” Kennedy told Brennan, they are worried about the cost of living.
He also called for a nationwide address explaining why the United States entered the conflict with Iran, what the administration hoped to achieve, and how it intended to bring the situation to a conclusion.
His position was not a blanket rejection of the administration’s strategy. Kennedy defended continued pressure on Iran while acknowledging the economic consequences of the partially closed strait. He opposed sending American troops into the situation, warning that deploying them could create a new set of problems.
That combination—support for pressure abroad alongside concern about prices at home—set the tone for the rest of the interview.
Nearly $1 Billion in Cuts Sparks a Constitutional Dispute
The conversation became more pointed when Brennan asked about the White House’s decision to cancel nearly $1 billion in previously approved federal funding without congressional consent.
Brennan raised concerns expressed by Senator Susan Collins, the Republican chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, who argued that the move threatened Congress’s constitutional authority over federal spending.
Kennedy disagreed.
“I love Susan like a taco, but she's wrong,” he said before explaining his view that Congress often appropriates money in broad categories, leaving agencies with considerable discretion over how funds are ultimately used.
He then deployed the phrase that would become the interview’s most memorable sound bite: “Spending porn.”
Kennedy used the expression to criticize what he considers wasteful government expenditures, pointing to funding for circumcision programs in Zambia and electric buses in Rwanda. He also argued that Congress should take greater responsibility for identifying and eliminating spending it believes is unnecessary.
But the disagreement was about more than whether particular programs were worthwhile. It raised a larger question: when Congress approves funding, how much authority should the executive branch have to cancel or redirect it?
Kennedy defended the cuts, while Brennan’s question highlighted the legal and constitutional objections. The interview did not resolve that dispute, but it brought the competing arguments into sharp focus.
Then Kennedy Turned the Standard on Trump
The most revealing moment came when Brennan shifted from the proposed cuts to taxpayer-funded advertising.
She asked Kennedy about a government-funded commercial prominently featuring President Donald Trump and praising his leadership. The question echoed earlier controversy surrounding former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, whose department had spent $220 million on a border-security advertising campaign in which she appeared prominently.
Kennedy had previously criticized Noem’s campaign. Now, with Trump featured in another advertisement paid for by the federal government, Brennan asked whether that spending was appropriate.
Kennedy’s response was notable because he explicitly included his own political allies—and himself—in the principle he was defending.
“I don't think any public official, including President Trump or Kristi Noem or John Kennedy, should spend public money on private ads for themselves,” he said.
He acknowledged that the White House viewed the issue differently but argued that public funds should not be used to promote individual politicians. He also suggested that politicians should not have buildings named after them while they are still alive.
That answer complicated any attempt to portray his position as simply a defense of the administration. Kennedy supported the proposed spending cuts, but he also applied his criticism of taxpayer-funded self-promotion to Trump.
The Real Takeaway From the Interview
The exchange was not a shouting match, nor does the published transcript establish that Brennan lost her composure or that Kennedy fact-checked a series of false statements from her. What it does show is a pointed discussion about economic priorities, congressional spending authority, and whether public money should be used to enhance a politician’s image.
Kennedy’s argument was straightforward: families are worried about affordability, government spending deserves scrutiny, and the rules should apply regardless of party.
Whether viewers agree with his assessment of the proposed cuts is a separate question. The legal dispute over executive spending authority and the debate over taxpayer-funded political advertising deserve examination beyond a few memorable television lines.
The moment worth watching is when Brennan moves from criticizing government spending in general to asking Kennedy about an advertisement featuring Trump himself. That is where the discussion becomes more complicated—and where Kennedy’s stated principle is tested against his own party’s leadership.
Watch the full interview through the link below to hear the exchange in context and decide how convincing each side’s argument really was.
