Trump Celebrates Plummeting Prescription Drug Prices As the Media Feverishly Works to Credit Biden

Trump Celebrates Plummeting Prescription Drug Prices As the Media Feverishly Works to Credit Biden

By Bob Hoge  

    

AP Photo/Rick Bowmer, File

The White House celebrated plunging prescription drug prices Monday as the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Wednesday that they saw the largest annual decline since 1963.

There are a lot of factors behind the news, and some drugs saw steep price drops while others did not. Mainstream media quickly began trying to hand all the credit to former President Joe Biden, however, the man who oversaw 9.1 percent inflation while in office.

The WH had a different opinion:

A statement on the White House website Monday said it was President Trump’s policies that had a lot more to do with it than Biden’s did (emphasis theirs:

President Trump Delivers Largest Prescription Drug Price Drop in Over 60 Years

President Donald J. Trump promised to slash prescription drug prices — and he has delivered. New data confirms prescription drug prices just recorded their largest annual decline in more than 60 years, the steepest drop since 1963, as the Trump Administration’s landmark Most Favored Nation policies take hold.

President Trump is the first President to actually lower prescription drug prices — a direct result of his bold action. Through Most Favored Nation pricing, 17 of the world’s largest drugmakers — covering approximately 86% of the branded drug market — have agreed to bring U.S. prices in line with the lowest paid by comparable developed nations, ending decades of Americans subsidizing cheaper drugs abroad and forcing fair pricing for patients at home.

Even the Washington Post was forced to cover the news, and you can bet they weren’t happy about it.

Prescription drug prices recorded the biggest year-over-year drop in more than 60 years in July, a startling reduction experts chalked up to an array of factors, including more generics and discount GLP-1 weight-loss drugs.

While overall costs for medical services continued to rise, prices for medicinal drugs fell 2.7 percent over the 12 months ending in July, the largest annual drop on record, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data released Wednesday. Prescription drugs, part of the medicinal drug category, fell by 3.1 percent, the steepest annual decline since March 1963.

---

MORE: Trump's Economy Quietly Helps Middle Class: Tax Refunds Jump, Drug Prices Drop, and Inflation Cools

'Good News': July Inflation Report Trend Earns Cheers From Financial Markets Analyst, White House

---

Like many outlets, though, the WaPo quickly pivoted to claiming that much of the credit goes to Biden and his ridiculously named behemoth Inflation Reduction Act. Team Trump pushed back:

White House spokesperson Kush Desai called attributing the decline to the IRA "idiotic and unfounded," arguing that its negotiated prices failed to deliver meaningful savings beyond existing insurer discounts.

Instead, they point to Trump’s May 2025 Executive Order 14297, “DELIVERING MOST-FAVORED-NATION PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICING TO AMERICAN PATIENTS,” which established a policy of the U.S. demanding the lowest (or near-lowest) price for pharmaceuticals compared to similar countries. Trump has long argued that we had been forking over substantially more for decades and subsidizing the rest of the world.

There are many other factors at play, and experts are busy arguing on social media and in long columns about the causes of the price drops and who should get the most credit. However, it’s long been customary for a commander in chief to take the victory lap for positive developments on their watch, and the reality is this is happening under Trump.

And the media is choking on the news.

“Prescription drug prices down more than at any time over 60 years,” Trump said Friday. “What else do I have to say?”

Nepo Baby Has a Hissy Fit — Pictures at 11

by Alan Joseph Bauer

AP Photo/Alex Brandon

How many multimillionaires on the left and right pretend to be men of the people?

After Burger King, Tucker Carlson has become the king of the whoppers. One of his latest involves a claim that Israel got Ben Shapiro into Harvard Law School. As is his wont, he just threw it out there as something obvious to everyone: the solution as to why Shapiro always seems so pro-Israel and how awful Israel is in interfering in American affairs via Carlson’s rival. Carlson does this often, claiming that Bibi Netanyahu controls Donald Trump and that the IDF killed “tens of thousands” of Gazan children, though the numbers don’t add up for him. When he spoke to Mike Huckabee, he said that a 14-year-old with a Kalashnikov cannot be killed, though in much of the world children are soldiers and terrorists and are considered as such.

With the Shapiro lie, Carlson relies on one of the pillars of his post-Fox career: he throws out a lie, one that cannot be proven 100 percent to be the lie it is. Israel has zero sway over Harvard. For years, the admissions office has accepted two Israelis — one Jew and one Arab. However hard I tried to get the kids I interviewed into the college, nothing worked. “Generational talent”, “not to be passed over,” and other options on the interviewer form made no difference: one Jew, one Arab, and better if one is male and one is female. So no, Israel did not get Ben Shapiro into Harvard. He is a bright and talented young fellow, and his success and accomplishments got him into Harvard. But now go PROVE that Israel did not get Ben over the finish line! There is the story from the Talmud of one sage telling the other that everyone is commenting on the latter’s sister being a prostitute. “But I have no sister!” “Prove that you have no sister!” And so it is. Harvard will not spill its admission secrets, even if Ben Shapiro approves their release. So Carlson has set up the perfect lie: something that has no basis in reality, advances his twisted way of thinking, and cannot be proven false. Additionally, if Shapiro or a Harvard official says otherwise, he can be written off as an agent of AIPAC.

Carlson did the same thing with his crack-friend, Hunter Biden. Biden swore in court that the laptop from hell was his, that he dropped it off for repair and failed to pick it up. All of the pictures, emails, and other material that makes him look like the drug-addled sex fiend money-vacuum that he is was the product of his own hand. But not according to Carlson. No, it was Israel who put those nasty, mean things on the laptop. And Biden, getting a free pass, immediately agreed with his decades-old friend. Everyone, including the two clowns involved, knows that Hunter is the author and owner of the crack pipe picture and the emails talking about taking money for his Big Guy father. But by invoking the Israelis, Biden goes free, and once again Israel is shown to be a nefarious force in the internal politics of the US. They were trying to change the outcome of the election! How dare those 51 guys blame the Russians! It was those Israelis. Now, you the viewer at home, go PROVE that it was not the Israelis. Even if Israel wasted its time to put out an official statement with lots of proof and details, Jew haters would never believe them. So it’s the perfect lie: it accomplishes the goal and can’t be proven false. Candace had it with the Charlie Kirk murder until the defense admitted the Kirk killing but said that the shooter did not endanger anyone else. Uh-oh, a lie that got put to bed.

It would be reassuring to simply say that Tucker Carlson lies to advance his distorted agenda. The problem is that there are many people who buy into his views because, like Carlson, they hate Jews and Israel and are only too happy to hear that those Jooooos are causing trouble in the US. One of the challenges faced by Nazi Germany after the orgy of Kristallnacht was the insurance payments to Jewish establishments destroyed by Brown Shirt thugs. The insurance companies came to Hermann Göring and said that they were looking at a one billion Reichsmark hole. The fat head of the economy declared that the Jews must pay this sum, because of the mess that they — the Jews — had made. Being number two only behind Hitler meant that his nonsensical edict could not be ignored or revoked. And this is Carlson’s method.

Recommended

The Death of Academic Fraud Jason Arday Won’t Shut Us UpKurt SchlichterDavid Hogg Got Leveled With a Brutal Community Note Regarding AI Data CentersDmitri Bolt

He accuses Israel of some sin that has no basis in reality, like the claim that Israel pushed Trump into the Iran War. Even when Donald Trump himself refutes the claim and offers his own personal reasons — which he has consistently put forth since the 1980s — for going to war, his claims are pushed away like paper. Who can prove that Bibi really didn’t push Donald to attack Tehran? Who can show that Bibi didn’t whisper something into the president’s ear that made him go to war? It’s the ideal fib, as it’s impossible to prove as false, even when all of the relevant parties and evidence show that it is a lie. Carlson starts with his desired outcome, throws out rubbish like Israel getting Shapiro into Harvard, and then relies on the reality that nobody can 100 percent prove that such was not the case. Even if Shapiro, Harvard, and Israel put out separate statements that Ben got in on his merit, Carlson would claim that they were all in cahoots to help Israel control the US. Who can believe them? What did you expect them to say?

Do you recall the “Hummus eaters of Jerusalem”? Whom did Carlson mean? The Jews whom he blames for Jesus’ death or the Netanyahu government whom he has openly — and falsely — blamed for Charlie Kirk’s murder? Those present with Kirk at a meeting prior to the TPUSA leader’s death made it clear that there was no pressure regarding Israel on Kirk. Carlson claims the opposite — that Bibi and others were pressuring the young conservative. Carlson relies on the fact that you weren’t at those meetings, so he can say what he wants. Anyone who was present and says otherwise is obviously a Zionist stooge, not ever to be believed. Heads I win, tails you lose. It’s a great racket, and Carlson and his cabal love to play it, because it’s nearly impossible to prove their lies as false.

Like many, if not most, I gave Carlson the benefit of the doubt after he was booted from Fox. I watched his interviews, and then he spoke with the Tate brothers. I then noted that he in no way contradicted them. He made no effort to speak with police officials associated with the indictments against them. He did not talk to women who had previously worked for the brothers. So I concluded that Tucker of Fox, who fought tooth and nail to get those J6 videos, was not interested in “the truth” but rather a narrative that he prefers. He never challenged any claim made by the Tates and agreed that all legal proceedings were based on stopping their effective approach to young men. How hard would it have been to find some young women who could describe their interactions and work with the Tates? That was not part of Carlson’s program, and it was then that I stopped watching his interviews.

Ben Shapiro has never pretended to be someone he isn’t. Tucker Carlson has run away from acting like the Swanson heir he really is.

https://townhall.com/columnists/alanjosephbauer/2026/08/17/nepo-baby-has-a-hissy-fitpictures-at-11-n2681329?utm_source=thdailyvip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&utm_content=ncl-UGNEu3GxxG&utm_term=&_nlid=UGNEu3GxxG&_nhids=ncgMnc9gsDQnls

FBI Releases Data on Historic Drop in Violent Crime Rate, Media Can't Figure Out Who to Credit

FBI Releases Data on Historic Drop in Violent Crime Rate, Media Can't Figure Out Who to Credit

By Sister Toldjah  

    

AP Photo/Seth Wenig

Back in May, the FBI shared what it called "preliminary data" indicating that violent crime in 2025 was down a staggering 9.3 percent compared to what it was in 2024.

"The data are considered preliminary and are subject to change prior to the release of Reported Crimes in the Nation, 2025, which is slated for later this year," the report stressed at the time.

"Later this year" is now, and on Friday, the Reported Crimes in the Nation report for 2025 was released, and it confirms that early look at the data, with the FBI calling it "the largest year-to-year decline in violent crime rates since FBI estimations began in 1936."

---

SEE ALSO: Crime Plummets in Trump Era: Homicide Rate on Pace for Lows Not Seen in 100 Years

---

The highlight reel was indeed impressive:

• Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter offenses decreased an estimated 18.1%.
• Rape offenses decreased an estimated 7.6%.
• Aggravated assault figures decreased an estimated 7.2%.
• Robbery offenses decreased an estimated 18.5%.

The 2025 murder rate of 4.1 per 100,000 inhabitants is tied with 1955 and 1956 for the lowest murder rate.

Property crime and hate crime also declined in 2025. 

Here's some other data Americans should be happy to see:

Under President Trump’s leadership and unwavering support for law enforcement:

→ National homicide rate DOWN 20%

→ Drug overdose deaths DOWN 20%

→ 8 of the FBI’s Top 10 Most Wanted fugitives arrested in the last 16 months

→ Violent offenders captured from around the world

→ The largest reduction in violent crime in American history

This FBI is delivering results — and America is safer because law enforcement has a President who backs the mission.

Interestingly, some media outlets, including CBS News, were hard-pressed to explain why there was such a dramatic drop, and were reluctant to give the Trump administration any credit because of course:

Despite the administration's focus on federal action, many criminal justice experts argue that the downward trend results from several complex factors rather than a single policy.

"The homicide drop is historic and crystal clear. But right now, what's driving it is about as clear as a glass of milk," said Adam Gelb, CEO of the Council on Criminal Justice, a nonpartisan think tank that releases early analysis of police department data each year.

"Rates are falling in cities with very different public safety strategies, economic conditions, and political leadership. The consistency across the map should make us cautious about handing credit to any one leader, party, policy, or program before the evidence catches up."

One would have to think that one reason for the big decline between 2024 and 2025 was President Trump's aggressive immigration enforcement agenda, where hundreds of thousands of criminal illegal aliens have been taken off the streets and sent back to their home countries, preventing them from victimizing anyone else here in the U.S. Further, illegal border crossings have virtually ground to a halt, which means safer streets across America.

Whatever the case may be, there's still a lot of work to be done, of course, which is why maintaining control of the House and Senate after the midterm elections is so crucial, in addition to the races at the city, county, and state level, which are equally important.

https://redstate.com/sister-toldjah/2026/08/16/violent-crime-down-media-at-a-loss-to-explain-why-n2205678?utm_source=rsmorningbriefingvip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

GOP Must Start Defining Democrats, Stop Playing Defense

(Lila Kate Wirtz Butkus/Dreamstime.com)

By Jacob LaneFriday, 14 August 2026 04:25 PM EDTCurrent | Bio | Archive

Add Newsmax On Google

Print|

    A   A

Working for Richard Viguerie, the pioneer of modern political direct marketing/advertising, has taught me many things.

The most important is this: brands matter.

Every successful company or business has one.

So does every successful political candidate and movement.

Apple doesn't just sell computers. Nike doesn't just sell shoes. Patagonia doesn't just sell outdoor wear, overpriced, in this writer's humble opinion.

All of them sell an identity. Politics is no different.

The average voter doesn't spend hours or days researching party platforms. They make decisions the same way consumers do, based on trust, familiarity and how a brand makes them feel.

In other words, people vote for brands.

The Democrats have understood this and capitalized on it for decades.

They've branded Republicans as Bible-thumping extremists, notably by Barack Obama in 2008:

"You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them.

"And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not.

"And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

And let's not forget Hillary Clinton's famous: "Basket of Deplorables," from Sept. 9, 2016.

Democrats, and others on the left, also label conservatives, inclusive of Republicans, as "wealthy elites" who are "a threat to democracy," and politicians more interested in helping billionaires than working families.

Whether that's true or not (it's not), the point is that they've repeated those messages enough times that millions of voters associate them with the Republican Party.

Republicans, by contrast, have spent years playing defense.

Instead of defining Democrats, they've been busy responding to Democratic attacks.

In politics, that's a losing strategy, as the side that defines its opponent first always has the advantage.

Republicans have an opportunity to change that in 2026.

The GOP doesn't need millions of dollars in opposition research or focus groups to do it.

Republicans simply need to show voters who today's Democratic Party has become, starting with something as basic as patriotism.

According to a recent Gallup poll, just 14% of Democrats say they are "extremely proud" to be an American, a record low for the party. Only 26% say they display the American flag outside their homes, compared to 70% of Republicans.

Now those numbers don't describe every Democrat.

But they reinforce a growing perception that today's Democratic Party has become downright hostile to something as simple as American pride.

Then there's the push to pack the U.S. Supreme Court.

Most voters agree court-packing or term limits would undermine one of America's most important independent institutions.

Yet polling has consistently found far greater support for expanding the Court among Democrats.

In Virginia, after the state Supreme Court struck down a Democrat-backed constitutional amendment on a 10-1 gerrymandered congressional map, the same lawmakers seriously considered imposing age limits to remove the Court’s current occupants, simply because they were upset with the ruling.

Consider women's sports.

A New York Times/Ipsos poll found that 79% of Americans oppose allowing biological males to compete in women's sports. Yet congressional Democrats overwhelmingly opposed legislation sponsored by Republicans tying Title IX protections to biological sex.

That's not exactly reading the room.

Republicans don't even have to work that hard to create a brand for today's Democratic Party. Increasingly, their own candidates are doing it themselves.

In Michigan, Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination at the time of this writing, has embraced several radical positions including abolishing/defunding ICE, refusing to recognize Israel's basic right to exist, and supporting efforts to defund police departments and law enforcement across the country.

In Texas, Senate candidate James Talarico has drawn attention for claims as ridiculous as the Bible actually permitting abortion and calling America’s southern border a "welcome mat."

In Maine, former Senate candidate Graham Platner faced scrutiny over a decades-old Nazi tattoo paying homage to the SS as well as multiple allegations of rape, all the while advocating fringe policies such as abolishing ICE and private healthcare insurance.

None of these candidates is running in the same state.

But together they reinforce a broader pattern Republicans shouldn't ignore: today's Democratic Party is comfortable nominating candidates whose views would have been considered politically toxic just a few years back.

Make no mistake, Republicans face a tough fight in 2026.

History isn't on their side since the president's party almost always loses seats in midterm elections. If Republicans somehow manage to hold both the U.S. House and U.S. Senate, they'll have bucked decades of political precedent.

That's why they can't afford to run another campaign built around dozens of talking points and disconnected policy debates.

Democrats, meanwhile, have a much easier sales pitch. They don't need a grand vision for America, nor do they need to defend their record. Their message is simple: we're not Donald Trump.

Republicans should not let them get away with that.

The Democratic Party should be judged on its own record, candidates and ideas.

Republicans have every opportunity to remind voters that this isn't the party of John F. Kennedy or even Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

It has become a party increasingly defined by positions that most Americans view as outside the mainstream.

If Republicans spend the next 90 days defending themselves, Democrats will happily define the election for them.

But if they consistently define today's Democratic Party by its own candidates and rhetoric, they will force Democrats to defend a brand many Americans aren't interested in buying and find downright toxic.

Nobody wins a marketing campaign by letting their competition write the advertisement.

Maybe it's time Republicans stopped letting Democrats write theirs.

https://www.newsmax.com/jacoblane/gop-obama-talarico/2026/08/14/id/1266152/

Wildfires, heat waves and blackouts exposed the green agenda’s dangerous flaws

Decades of ideology masquerading as environmental stewardship have left people less safe while doing little to help the environment

By Clare Ath Fox News

Wildfire smoke now poses top pregnancy risk, study finds

Hackensack Meridian Medical Group's Dr. Craig Basman explains a new study identifying wildfire smoke as the top pregnancy pollutant. He warns of severe health risks while providing safety guidance for expectant mothers.

This summer, secular environmentalism died in plain sight. From the choking wildfire smoke blanketing American cities to the deadly European heat wave to the crumbling power grid in New York, the evidence is piling up: decades of ideology masquerading as environmental stewardship have left people less safe while doing little to help the environment.

Start with Canada. More than 800 wildfires burned across the country this summer, and the smoke descended on over 100 million Americans from Milwaukee to Washington D.C. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney blamed the fires on climate change. But that raises an obvious question: if climate change is driving these disasters, then what exactly have decades of Canada's aggressive climate policies accomplished? By Carney's own logic, they've failed. Canadians accepted higher energy costs, more regulation, yet the forests are still burning and Americans are breathing the smoke.

Canada has been governed for years by politicians who embraced the secular environmentalist vision wholesale. Prime Minister Carney is a former U.N. special envoy on climate action. Former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was the poster child of left-wing climate policy. Canada has had over a decade of committed "climate leadership."

20 YEARS LATER, AL GORE AND HIS DIRECTOR DEFEND THEIR CONTROVERSIAL CLIMATE MOVIE 'AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH'

Video

Yet the fires are still here, not despite secular environmentalists, but because of them. Environmental groups have blocked the very forest management practices that prevent catastrophic wildfires, opposing forest thinning, firebreaks and controlled burns on the grounds that human intervention is inherently destructive. As Andrew Hale of Advancing American Freedom put it, Canada's wildfire policies reflect the "undue influence of environmental groups who are firmly politically motivated and have divorced themselves from science and good stewardship."

The 2023 Canadian wildfires alone released nearly 480 megatonnes of carbon, roughly twice the annual emissions of global aviation. The fires this year could be even worse. Canada's purported commitment to international emissions agreements and a left-wing green agenda have all been overwhelmed by wildfire smoke, and it’s everyday ranchers, homeowners and citizens who pay the price.

But Canada isn’t the only showcase in environmentalist failure. Earlier this summer, roughly 14,000 people died in a European heat wave. But it would be wrong to say they died from heat. Vast swaths of America face similar levels of heat every summer without the death toll. The difference is in America, roughly 90% of homes have air conditioning, whereas in Europe, only about 20% do.

Video

That choice is deliberate. When asked whether Europeans should install air conditioning in response to deadly heat waves, a European Environment Agency expert told CBS News that she did not think it should be the solution anywhere, warning that installing more AC emits more heat into the environment and accelerates warming. In other words, to save lives we must let people die. Meanwhile, in a resurrection of feudalism, senior European Commission officials kept their AC running on the upper floors while it was shut off for regular staff below.

Here in America, we can look at Canadian haplessness and European hypocrisy and shake our heads. But we’re hardly immune from warming temperatures and inane political responses.

This past Fourth of July — the grand 250th birthday of our nation — Washington, D.C., hit 103 degrees for the hottest Independence Day on record. Philadelphia cancelled its parade after three consecutive days above 101. And New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani asked residents to set their thermostats to 78 degrees to protect the power grid. At least in America we have AC, but that AC won’t matter much if the grid fails — and in New York, it’s at risk of failing because of, once again, the environmentalists.

In 2021, green activists forced the closure of Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant, eliminating roughly 25% of the New York City region's power supply. As expected, wind and solar could not fill such a gap, so New York began to use more natural gas. Not only did environmentalists force New York to increase emissions for no reason, they made New York’s grid highly dependent on a single fuel source and more vulnerable to demand spikes that cause grid failure. Like those in Canada and Europe, American greens value ideology over outcome.

Video

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

The failure of secular environmentalism has one root cause: it sees people and human activities as enemies. But when human flourishing is put at the center of environmental policy and human resourcefulness is applied to the environmental problems of our day, our current crises become solvable.

With a human-centric environmentalism, Canada would have no difficulty engaging in responsible forest management that uses reason to steward the land and reduce wildfire risk. Europe could accept that the miraculous invention of air conditioning saves lives without meaningfully worsening the climate. And New York would see that the incredible advances of nuclear energy provide clean, reliable baseload power that intermittent renewables cannot match.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

There’s no reason to sacrifice people’s lives and well-being to save the planet. If anything, the opposite is true: Only people have the power to care for God’s creation and leave it better than we found it.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/wildfires-heat-waves-blackouts-exposed-green-agenda-dangerous-flaws

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/wildfires-heat-waves-blackouts-exposed-green-agenda-dangerous-flaws