Nashville federal judge finds “likelihood” prosecution of Kilmar Abrego Garcia is vindictive

Kilmar Abrego Garcia accompanied by his attorney, was released from the
Putnam County Jail on August 22, 2025.
(Photo: John Partipilo/ Tennessee Lookout)

by Anita Wadhwani, Nashville Outlook, October 6, 2025 - A federal judge in Nashville ruled that there is a “realistic likelihood” that the government behaved vindictively in bringing human smuggling charges against Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Maryland man wrongly deported to El Salvador before being brought to Tennessee in June to face criminal charges.

The 16-page ruling by U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw on Friday opens the door for Abrego’s attorneys to seek documents and testimony from Trump administration officials about their public remarks in the case and the basis of their decision to bring criminal charges. 

Crenshaw noted that the government has repeatedly been thwarted in its months-long efforts to deport Abrego in one of the earliest – and highest profile – tests of the Trump administration’s mass deportation tactics.

“This has created a significant burden on and embarrassment to the Executive Branch, that must now expend additional time, resources, and international goodwill to remove Abrego to El Salvador or elsewhere,” he wrote.

Abrego, as he is identified in the Tennessee case, illegally entered the United States as a teen and worked as an apprentice sheet metal worker in Maryland. The 30-year-old married father was deported in March despite a standing stay of deportation to El Salvador issued in 2019 by an immigration judge. A federal prosecutor who admitted Abrego’s deportation was in error was fired after his statements and has since filed a claim of retaliation. 

Abrego currently faces potential deportation to the African country of Eswatini, government officials have told his attorneys. He is due to return to a Maryland court in that case on Friday.

In granting Abrego’s request to proceed with allegations the government behaved improperly, Crenshaw highlighted the timeline of official actions leading up to Abrego’s criminal charges in Tennessee as evidence of “potential unreasonableness of the prosecution.”

Abrego was deported on March 15 after a routine Maryland traffic stop. Nine days later, attorneys for Abrego successfully filed suit in a Maryland federal court challenging the deportation in a decision the government appealed. The Supreme Court concurred with the decision. 

Crenshaw noted that within “mere days” of the Supreme Court decision, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security reopened an investigation into a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee, which resulted in neither a ticket nor an arrest at the time.

The government brought charges against Abrego less than a month after it started its reopened investigation — a remarkably swift investigation. A grand jury returned a two-count indictment a month later and Abrego was returned to Nashville to face charges. He has since been released pending trial and remains in the custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Abrego has pleaded not guilty to the charges.

On the day of his indictment, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and others “celebrated the criminal charges against him” and said he would be found guilty, sentenced and deported again to El Salvador, Crenshaw wrote.

“Most tellingly,” the judge wrote, Homeland Security Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche revealed that the government started investigating Abrego after a judge in Maryland questioned the government’s decision, found that it had no right to deport him to El Salvador and accused the government of wrongdoing.

“Deputy Attorney General Blanche’s remarkable statements could directly establish the motivations for Abrego’s criminal charges stem from his exercise of constitutional and statutory rights to bring suit against the (federal government), rather than a genuine desire to prosecute him for alleged criminal misconduct,” Crenshaw wrote.

Prosecutors have denied that the government has acted with any “ill will” in the case.”

Crenshaw’s order contains no final conclusions on whether the case against Abrego should be dismissed due to vindictive prosecution, but instead greenlights a request by Abrego’s attorneys to proceed with collecting evidence to present at an evidentiary hearing. No date for the hearing has been set. 

Top Stories

Aftyn Behn is the Democrat Nominee for TN-07. She Won't Get My Vote.

by Rod Williams, Oct. 8, 2025- Since Donald Trump has a solid lock on the Republican Party and Republicans will not resist his authoritarianism, his disregard for the Constitution, or investigate his corruption and abuse of power, I have reluctantly concluded that the best thing that could happen is if Democrats could retake the House. I do not want them to take both chambers, and I want their margin to be very thin. I want just enough Dems to win to cause gridlock and for the House to be able to conduct oversight hearings. 

Despite concluding I wanted Trump's lock on the House broken, I voted in the Republican Primary to choose the Republican nominee for the upcoming special election to fill the vacancy for the Seventh Congressional District. I concluded that the 7th being an overwhelmingly Republican district, whoever wins the Republican nomination will most likely be the next congressman from the district. I wanted the best candidate we could get. 

After studying each of the candidates, I concluded Van Epps was the most sensible and least Trumpy of the 11 candidates running. I voted for him, voting early this year, which is something I rarely do. Right before election day, Donald Trump endorsed Van Epps and I regretted my vote. Had I waited until election day to vote, I would have had to take a second look at the candidates and may have actually voted in the Democratic primary instead of the Republican primary. I do not want to facilitate Trump's march toward authoritarianism. 

I thought that, despite a Democratic candidate being a long shot to win the general election, if I had not already voted, I would vote in the Democratic primary as a matter of conscience. I also thought that when the general election rolls around, I might vote for the Democratic nominee. 

Now that the primary is behind us, and I see that the Democratic nominee is Aftyn Behn, I don't think I can bring myself to cast a vote for the Democrat. Dems picked the worst of the candidates running. I might could vote for a Bo Mitchell; but not Aftyn Behn. 

I may just sit out this election. I have time to think about it, but it is a tough choice when one must choose between a radical leftist and a Trump loyalist.  I have not paid any attention to the independents who are running and despite an independent having no chance of winning, I may give them a look. I may determine that Van Epps, despite the Trump endorsement, is the least bad choice. However, I don't feel compelled to vote. When given two bad choices, it is okay not to choose. 

Aftyn Behn is a community organizer for the Tennessee Justice Center. She once disrupted the proceedings of the Tennessee House of Representatives and had to be removed from the chamber gallery. She is a pro-abortion activist. She had the endorsements of the Democratic Socialists of America and the Progressive Democrats of America in the primary. I can't to it. I can't vote for her. 

Top Stories

Three of the Four Trust Funds Are Within Seven Years of Insolvency.

 

From Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, Oct. 8, 2025- Some of the nation’s largest and most important programs are financed through government trust funds that collect dedicated revenues and then distribute those funds. This includes Social Security’s Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) and Disability Insurance (SSDI) programs, Medicare’s Hospital Insurance (HI) program, and the Highway Trust Fund (HTF).   These programs provide direct benefits to nearly 70 million Americans and serve or insure at least 200 million more through either cash benefits in case of retirement, disability, or death; health insurance for older Americans and those with disabilities; or construction and maintenance of interstate surface transportation.   Unfortunately, program costs have been outstripping dedicated revenue, and three of the four trust funds are within seven years of insolvency. Once the trust funds run out of reserves, the law requires an across-the-board cut in benefits or spending to match costs with revenue.   Changes are needed to rescue these trust funds from insolvency. Our new Trust Fund Solutions Initiative will put forward concrete and novel policy ideas for each of the major trust funds. In this piece, we explain that trust fund solutions can:   Prevent insolvency of the Social Security retirement, Medicare hospital, and Highway trust funds, otherwise expected within seven years. Avert deep across-the-board cuts, including a 24 percent Social Security benefit cut – about $18,400 for a typical couple turning 60 this year – a 12 percent Medicare cut, and a 46 percent highway spending cut. Improve the nation’s fiscal outlook and help stabilize the debt-to-GDP ratio. Accelerate economic growth and increase incomes and wealth. Offer an opportunity to better target benefits, encourage work and support savings, strengthen retirement security, support workers with disabilities, lower health care costs, maximize efficiency, and improve public investments.   With the insolvency of three major trust funds only seven years away or less, policymakers are running out of time to act. The longer policymakers delay, the fewer options will be available and the more painful the choices will be.   The looming insolvency of the trust funds is a major challenge but also offers an important opportunity. It’s time for trust fund solutions. Trust Fund Solutions Can Prevent Looming Insolvency   Three of the government’s largest and most important trust funds are within seven years of insolvency. Based on projections from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the Highway Trust Fund – which is mainly financed with a gas tax – will run out of reserves in 2028. Meanwhile, the Social Security retirement trust fund and Medicare Hospital Insurance trust fund, based on estimates from the programs’ own Trustees, will be insolvent by late 2032. And on a theoretically combined basis, the Social Security retirement and disability trust funds will run out in 2034.   CBO reaches similar conclusions on Social Security, estimating the retirement trust fund would run out in 2033 and the theoretically combined trust funds in 2034. Although CBO previously estimated the Medicare trust fund would run out in fiscal year 2052, that insolvency date is likely to be much sooner in light of the effects of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and other changes.   In any case, legislative action is needed to prevent insolvency and continue to pay full benefits.

Expected insolvency dates are looming in the very near future. The Highway Trust Fund is less than three years from insolvency – before many recently-approved projects even break ground.   Meanwhile, Social Security’s and Medicare’s depleting trust funds are only seven years from exhaustion. In other words, the funds will run out when today’s 60-year-olds reach the Normal Retirement Age and when today’s youngest retirees turn 69. Most seniors on the program today will still be collecting benefits when the trust fund is exhausted. Trust Fund Solutions Can Prevent Sharp Benefit Cuts   Under the law, trust fund program outlays cannot exceed revenues after reserves are exhausted, meaning insolvency of each of the major trust funds threatens massive benefit and service cuts. Upon trust fund depletion, highway spending faces a 46 percent cut, Medicare providers face a 12 percent cut, and Social Security retirees face an across-the-board 24 percent benefit cut. By 2050, we estimate those cuts will grow to 74, 16, and 27 percent, respectively.

To put these cuts in context, the Social Security cuts would equal an $18,400 loss in annual benefits for a typical couple retiring at the start of 2033. The actual benefit reduction will differ based on earning history, family structure, and collection age, but will be large in almost all cases. At around the same time that Social Security runs dry, Medicare’s hospital fund will run out, forcing a 12 percent reduction in outlays. This could lead to a major disruption in access to care as Medicare stops or delays payments to hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, and other providers.   Federal highway and transportation spending, meanwhile, would be cut in half. As a practical matter, this would result in a freeze for all new projects and a slowdown in existing ones which could threaten the government’s ability to maintain safe and open highways, buses, ferries, and railways for many of the nation’s commuters, commercial drivers, and train passengers.  Trust Fund Solutions Can Improve the Nation’s Fiscal Outlook   In addition to preserving solvency and preventing deep across-the-board benefit cuts, trust fund solutions can reduce unified budget deficits and improve the nation’s fiscal outlook – at least relative to a scenario where scheduled spending continues regardless of available trust fund reserves, as in the CBO baseline (which by law is required to assume continued spending).   Based on CBO’s projections, the Social Security, Medicare, and Highway trust funds are projected to spend $4.3 trillion – or 1.1 percent of GDP – more than they collect in revenue over the next ten years. Their combined annual shortfall will grow to 1.7 percent of GDP by 2050 and continue to rise thereafter. This borrowing is a major driver of the country’s projected national debt.   Under CBO’s baseline, we project that debt will rise from nearly 100 percent of GDP today to 170 percent by 2060. If each trust fund program’s spending was limited to available revenue after reserves run out, debt would grow much more slowly to about 125 percent of GDP by 2060. In other words, simply avoiding borrowing or general revenue funding to finance Social Security, Medicare, and highways would close about two-thirds of the fiscal gap over the next 35 years.

More thoughtful and pro-growth reforms could go even further and fully stabilize the debt (albeit at too high a level). Such trust fund solutions could begin to phase in policy changes immediately, fully address 75-year shortfalls, put downward pressure on interest rates, and accelerate economic growth. One illustrative package we modelled would slow and then reverse the growth of debt, putting debt on a downward path toward 100 percent of GDP in the early 2060s. Trust Fund Solutions Can Grow the Economy and Boost Incomes   Restoring solvency to the major trust funds would not only prevent a deep benefit cut under current law and avoid massive borrowing in the event that the law is ignored, but it could also significantly improve economic growth and thus boost household income and wealth.   In 2023, CBO estimated that the very crude and simple policy of limiting Social Security benefits to available revenue – after a painful near-term disruption – would boost real Gross National Product (GNP) in 2050 by 3.7 percent as a result of smaller deficits relative to CBO’s baseline and more precautionary work and saving as Americans adjusted to lower benefits. This is the equivalent of a 0.2 percentage point increase in annual real GNP growth.   More thoughtful reforms could generate additional economic growth and do so with far less disruption. In 2019, CRFB’s Marc Goldwein, Maya MacGuineas, and Chris Towner released a pro-growth Social Security framework with revenue and benefit reforms that they estimated would boost real GNP growth by more than 8 percent – about 0.25 percent per year – by promoting work and saving while reducing deficits and improving economic certainty.  In 2021, staff of the Penn Wharton Budget Model (PWBM) put out an entitlement reform framework to increase revenue, slow the growth of Social Security benefits, and reduce Medicare costs. They estimated their plan would boost GDP by 5 percent by 2050 – about 0.2 percent per year – and presumably it would boost GNP significantly more.   And based on a 2012 CBO analysis, simply raising the major Social Security and Medicare ages by two years would boost output by 2.6 percent by 2060. Other reforms – from investing more efficiently in infrastructure to lowering the cost of health care – could generate further growth. Time for Novel Solutions   Restoring solvency to the Social Security, Medicare, and Highway trust funds will mean identifying a combination of policies to lower costs, increase dedicated revenue, or both.   Those policies could go beyond simply saving money by also helping to achieve other important policy goals such as better targeting benefits, improving retirement security, lowering health care costs, reducing work disincentives, promoting savings, encouraging productive aging, supporting workers with disabilities, cutting waste and abuse, more efficiently raising revenue, investing in higher-return infrastructure, improving program administration, and more broadly promoting stronger growth and higher standards of living.   Already, there are many well-known ideas to reduce Medicare costs, slow the growth of Social Security, secure highway funding, and improve revenue collection. Unfortunately, many of these ideas have become politicized, and most were developed decades ago and thus don’t fully reflect recent changes to the economy and health care systems.   The Trust Fund Solutions Initiative aims to supplement the existing library of options with a series of novel solutions that may help to re-invigorate discussion over how to best rescue the trust funds. Over the next two years, we will release a series of white papers introducing these novel solutions and using independent modeling to analyze their effects. Some of the proposals we will introduce may include:   A broad-based Employer Compensation Tax to replace employer-side payroll taxes. A Social Security COLA Cap to limit benefit growth for wealthy seniors. Medicare’s post-acute care payments and coverage reforms. A new Earn-As-You-Go benefit formula for Social Security that credits all years of work equally toward benefits and ends most existing work disincentives. A fee-based system to fund highway investments. Limits to six-figure benefits from the Social Security program. A new cost-effective program to fund medical residents and encourage primary care. Retirement age increases coupled with protections for vulnerable seniors. Reforms to the income taxation of Social Security benefits.   It is unlikely that any of these novel solutions will fix the financial imbalances of the major trust funds on their own. But in combination with each other or other thoughtful adjustments and reforms, these ideas could meaningfully advance solvency. Policymakers should add them to the existing menus of potential reforms and urgently begin the work of saving our trust funds.   New solutions will be published on the Trust Fund Solutions Initiative website. Conclusion   Within the next seven years, Americans are likely to face the insolvency of the Social Security, Medicare, and Highway trust funds, at which point the law requires deep across-the-board cuts. This includes a 46 percent cut in highway spending in just three years, a 12 percent cut to Medicare payments when today’s youngest Medicare beneficiaries are 72, and a 24 percent cut to Social Security retirement benefits when today’s youngest retirees are 69 and today’s 60-year-olds reach the normal retirement age.   Policymakers should urgently begin work to avoid these cuts and rescue the trust funds. Restoring trust fund solvency provides lawmakers with an opportunity to enact reforms while ensuring that these programs continue to function as intended. Thoughtful trust fund solutions can reduce deficits, stabilize the national debt, accelerate economic growth, reduce interest rates, lower health care costs, strengthen retirement security, support work, improve program administration, and enhance public investment.   There are numerous ways to achieve these goals. Unfortunately, excessive demagoguing, insufficient candor, and lack of political will have too often prevented policymakers from enacting well-known and thoroughly-vetted policy solutions.   At the same time, new realities call for new ideas. The Trust Fund Solutions Initiative will put forward a series of novel solutions that could help rescue the trust funds and perhaps reinvigorate the solvency debate. Our new trust fund solutions will aim to provide practical ways to restore financial balance to the trust funds and help address the economic and health challenges facing the country today. We encourage others to put forward solutions as well.   With the major trust funds only a few years from insolvency, there is little time to waste.   The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget does not endorse any particular solution to restore solvency to the Social Security, Medicare, and Highway trust funds. The novel policies presented in this series should be added to the library of potential options policymakers consider when crafting a broader reform package. The insolvency of each of the major trust funds is only seven years away or less, and trust fund solutions are urgently needed.

Top Stories

CM Ginny Welsch is Confused. She Thinks She is at the UN instead of the Metro Council

Top Stories

Dems Do Not Have the Moral High Ground; They Are Just Not the Immediate Threat.

by Rod Williams, Oct. 7, 2025- There is no doubt that Donald Trump has coarsened the dialogue. One could offer various examples. That being said, like so much liberal criticism of Donald Trump and his "basket of deplorables," it didn't all start with Donald Trump. From the use of lawfare, to contempt for freedom of speech, to promotion of violence, to violating the Constitution, to incivility, we are all supposed to pretend that this all originated with Donald Trump. It didn't. 

Donald Trump is an immediate threat, and resistance to Trump should be our focus. I am convinced he has the heart of an authoritarian and he is a threat to democracy. He is unique in that he will violate norms and he is unique in the degree of his administration's vindictiveness and abuse of power. However, he is unique in degree, not in kind. 

Donald Trump has broken norms and transferred power to the administrative branch. Even after Donald Trump passes from the scene, I am not sure we will return to normal. I see signs that the Democratic party is not committed to the same values I am. I fear that after the Trump era passes, we may get an illiberal liberal version of Donald Trump.

While I consider myself part of the resistance, I am uncomfortable with the self-righteous, sanctimonious, delusional, and selective outrage about Donald Trump and his administration. Where were all of the champions of democracy when Joe Biden, on his way out the door, tried to amend the Constitution by executive fiat? Where were all of the opponents of violence and advocates of civility when angry BLM mobs were burning buildings, toppling statues, looting, and beating innocent people back in 2020? 

Where are all of the advocates of civility and opponents of inflammatory rhetoric, and critics of incitement to violence when it comes to Jay Jones, the Democratic nominee for Virginia’s attorney general? 

Jones, a former member of the Virginia state house, is running in the November election for Attorney General, challenging incumbent Republican Jason Miyares. Jones has said some disgusting things. When former state legislator Joe Johnson Jr., a moderate Democrat with a long tenure in Virginia politics, passed away, he was eulogized by Virginia politicians of both parties. Jones said of those Republicans eulogizing Johnson, "“If those guys die before me, I will go to their funerals to piss on their graves” to “send them out awash in something.”

He also said, if he was trapped in a room with a gun and two bullets, alongside Hitler, Pol Pot, and Todd Gilbert (then the Republican speaker of the state house), he would shoot Gilbert — twice. 

These comments were inadvertently made public. However, Jay Jones has not tried to explain them away or apologize.  Can one imagine the outrage if a Republican had said something similar about a Democrat? Where are the Democrats calling on Jones to resign? Where is the outrage?

Like I said, Trump Republicans are saying and doing more bad things than Democrats, but not different kinds of things. Dems do not have the moral high ground; they are just not an immediate threat. 

Top Stories

Congress Should Eliminate the ‘Shutdown’ Charade

 by DOMINIC PINO, National Review, Oct. 7, 2025- The federal government has been out of money since 1835. That was the last year in which the U.S. had no national debt. So it might seem a little silly to say that the government has to shut down because it ran out of money on October 1. And, well, it is silly.

Government shutdowns are not a requirement of the Constitution or of common sense. They are the product of the interaction of statutes that Congress can and should change. Government shutdowns don’t improve the quality of governance or the country’s fiscal health, and Congress should end them forever.

... The political calculation for shutdowns often includes the belief that voters will feel the pain and demand a way out, which the party that caused the shutdown hopes will mean granting its wishes. But most voters feel no pain. Social Security checks still go out, and Medicare and Medicaid coverage continues during government shutdowns. Those programs, plus interest payments on the national debt, which also continue to be made during shutdowns, account for about three-quarters of all federal spending.

Those programs, plus interest payments, are also the long-run drivers of the national debt. The rest of the federal budget is roughly balanced over the long run. That means that a lapse in government funding causes the balanced part of the budget to stop while the deficit-causing part continues as before. It’s nonsensical.

... For most of the furloughed employees, a government shutdown is basically a strange type of vacation, because the duration of that vacation is decided by Congress. Furloughed workers are not allowed to work or even be signed on to government computer networks. Far from being a harsh punishment of faceless bureaucrats, shutdowns are kind of nice for them while they last. ...they are legally entitled to back pay once the shutdown is over. ... most workers don’t even miss a paycheck. ...most voters and federal workers don’t feel much pain from government shutdowns. ... what can Congress do to fix this system? (read more)

Top Stories

These Are the Candidates for the TN-O7 Republican Primary.

by Rod Williams, Oct. 6, 2025-  The primary election is tomorrow and 11 Republicans are on the ballot seeking the nomination to be the Republican candidate in the general election.

The Seventh Congressional District is overwhelmingly a Republican District, so whoever wins the Republican nomination will most likely be the next Congressman from that district. So, while we are more than likely going to end up with a Trump loyalist with no backbone to oppose Trump's march toward authoritarianism, I still think it is better to have a smart, thoughtful person who knows what he is doing is wrong rather than one who is an absolute non-thinking Trump sycophant. That is to say, I would rather have someone like Mark Green than someone like Andy Ogles.

I have already voted, voting on the last day of early voting. I voted for Matt Van Epps. Normally, I wait until Election Day to vote, but I was supposed to be out of town tomorrow. As it turns out, my plans fell through, and I am not out of town. If I had not already voted, I would have to rethink my vote. The reason is that Matt Van Epps has received the endorsement of Donald Trump. If Van Epps is Trump's preferred candidate, he can't be very good. 

I studied each of the candidates, read the mailers they sent me, visited their websites, examined their ads, took note of who was endorsing whom, and watched the videoed candidate forums, and reached my decision to vote for Matt Van Epps. I was confident I had selected the best candidate until he got the Trump endorcement. 

While all of the candidates to one degree or another, pledged their support for Donald Trump and his agenda, Van Epps seemed the least dogmatic. Many of the candidates seem like thoughtless followers in a cult rather than thoughtful people. In some ways, Van Epps is boring. He talks about policy. He doesn't rant about the social issues and doesn't go on about a stolen election. He doesn't spread conspiracy theories. He sounds reasonable and responsible. He seems to most resemble a pre-Trump era normal Republican. 

Reasoning that Van Epps seemed the least "Trumpy" of the candidates, I was surprised that Donald Trump endorsed Matt Van Epps. If I had not already voted, I might just skip voting, or I might vote in the Democratic primary or vote in the Republican primary for a different candidate. Since the Trump endorsement of Van Epps has caused me to rethink my own vote, I cannot offer much guidance as for whom to vote. 

Below are the Republican candidates for the Seventh Congressional District, with links to their websites, Facebook pages and other sources of information and prominent endorcements.

Jody Barrett

Rep. Jody Barrett: Dickson attorney Barrett has served in the Tennessee General Assembly since his 2020 election. Barrett received a perfect score from the Trumpian Tennessee Legislative Report Card, which is operated in partnership with Tennessee Stands. If you don't know Tennessee Stands, they are a kooky Trumpy outfit. Getting their endorsement is a disqualifier for me.

Barrett has come under a vicious, sleazzy attack by a group affiliated with the Club for Growth due to his opposition to Gov. Lee's school voucher program. While I personally support school choice, I think the attacks against Barrett are disgusting and I briefly considered voting for him simply because I am repulsed by the attack ads. For more on this and to see the ad, go to I am Almost Persuaded to Vote for Jody Barrett Due to this Disgusting Attack Ad.

Website: https://www.jodybarrettfortennessee.com/

Facebook page: Jody Barrett for Tennessee

Gino Bulso

Rep. Gino Bulso: A Brentwood trial lawyer specializing in personal injury suits, Bulso was elected to the legislature in 2022. He has said focusing on the national debt will be a priority. 

Website: https://votegino.com/

Facebook: Gino Bulso for Congress

Lee Reeves

Rep. Lee Reeves: Reeves, of Franklin, won the Republican primary for House District 65 by less than 100 votes in August 2024, before going on to win the general election. Reeves’ wife, Claire, serves on the Williamson County School Board. 

After Trump endorsed Van Epps, Reeves announced he was withdrawing from the race, but his name will still be on the ballot. 

Reeves has received the endorsement of Knox County Mayor Glenn Jacobs, Tennessee Senate Majority Leader Jack Johnson (R-Franklin), former Davidson County Republican Party Chairman Lonnie Spivak, and Country music artist John Rich. To read more about why these people support Reeves see, TN-7 Candidate Lee Reeves Picks Up Notable Endorsements from Tennessee Republican Leaders. 

Website: https://leereeves.com/

Facebook: Lee Reeves for Congress 

Matt Van Epps

Matt Van Epps: Van Epps is the former Tennessee commissioner of General Services under Gov. Bill Lee. Prior to that, he worked as vice president of Main Street Health, which coordinates care for Medicare patients in rural clinics. A graduate of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, Van Epps is a lieutenant colonel in the Tennessee National Guard. Van Epps. 

Van Epps has received the endorsement of President Donald J. Trump, Governor Bill Lee, Congressman Mark Green and Congressman Jim Jordan.   Also, he has been endorsed by a bunch of mayors and vice mayors and city councilmen of the various cities in the Seventh Congressional District.

Website: https://www.mattfortn.com/

Facebook: Matt Van Epps

Stewart Parks: Parks, a Nashville real estate agent, served time in federal prison for his participation in the Jan. 6, insurrection, in which he was charged with disorderly conduct, intent to impede and disrupt the operations of Congress and property theft. President Donald Trump pardoned Parks in January 2025 as part of his general pardon of those who took part in the J6 insurrection.  
Website: https://parksfortn.com/

Stewart Cooper: Cooper, of Franklin, works in sales for Flagler Technologies, a Florida-based provider of information technology services. His website says nothing Trumpian and that is a plus.

Website: https://www.cooper4congress.com/

Adolph Agbéko Dagan: No information is available for Dagan. I may vote for Daagan, simply because I know nothing about him and assume he is not a serious candidate, so a vote for Dagan, is sort like voting for "none of the above."

Mason Foley: Foley, of Franklin, served as a staff member for U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, from 2020-2022 before joining Main Street Health, which works with Medicaid patients in rural areas. 

Foley has received the endorsement of former Metro Nashville mayoral candidate Alice Rolli.

Among the candidates who are not being considered major candidates, it looks like Foley should be, and maybe the polls are wrong. He strikes me as top-tier material and he does have ads running on TV. I do not know how old he is, but he calls himself Gen Z and appears young. While his website pledges his support for the Trump agenda, he does not stoke the culture wars and his tone is less vitriolic than some of the other candidates. I am considering voting for him.

Website: Foley for Congress

Facebook: Foley for Congress

Jason D. Knight: Knight formerly served on the Clarksville City Council and is currently a member of the Montgomery County Commission. He works in information systems management and served nine years on active duty with the U.S. Army’s 101st Airborne Division, which is based in Clarksville. 

I like the tone of his campaign as expressed on his website and his common-sense, traditional conservative policy positions.  He checks the Trump loyalty box without overdoing it. I could vote for him.

Website: https://www.jasonknight.org/

Joe Leurs: Leurs is a retired non-commissioned officer with the U.S. Marines and retired from the Metro Nashville Police Department. Website: https://www.joeleurs-tn.com/

Tres Wittum: Wittum is a former Tennessee Senate staff member who ran for Congress in Tennessee’s 5th District in 2022. He also ran for U.S. Senate against incumbent Sen. Marsha Blackburn in 2024. Website: https://treswittum.com/

If you are considering voting in the Democrat primary, for information on Democratic candidates, see 

Meet the TN-07 Democratic Candidates

Top Stories

Trump endorses Van Epps in Middle Tennessee U.S House race, Reeves drops out

By Adam Friedman, Tennessee Lookout, October 6 2025- President Donald Trump endorsed former state General Services Commissioner Matt Van Epps in the crowded Republican field for Tennessee’s 7th U.S. Congressional District, four days before the primary election.

Trump in his endorsement, called Van Epps a “MAGA Warrior.”

“A West Point Graduate, and Combat Decorated Army Helicopter Pilot, Matt knows the WISDOM and COURAGE required to Defend our Country, Support our Incredible Military/Veterans, and Ensure PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH,” Trump said in a statement.

Shortly after Trump’s endorsement became public, Rep. Lee Reeves, a Franklin Republican, announced he was backing Van Epps and dropping out of the race, citing the endorsement.

“Today, the President called a play I did not expect,” Reeves said in a statement, comparing Trump to a football quarterback.

There were 11 GOP candidates running in the Republican primary to replace former U.S. Rep. Mark Green, who retired in July. Van Epps and state reps. Jody Barrett, Gino Bulso and Lee Reeves were widely considered the frontrunners in the race.

The 7th District is a Middle Tennessee-based seat that runs west of the Tennessee River, covering about a dozen rural counties, before taking a claw-like bite out of a third of north and west Nashville and the western half of Williamson County. It’s considered a Clarksville-based congressional district, and the Cook Political Index rated it as a “solid Republican” seat.

Trump’s endorsement of Van Epps  follows Gov. Bill Lee, who publicly backed his former cabinet member’s congressional bid earlier in the week.

Most of the outside spending in the race has focused on Van Epps and Barrett, a Dickson Republican, who opposed Lee’s signature private-school voucher plan.

The Republican winner will face the winner of the Democratic Primary between businessman Darden Copeland and Nashville state reps. Aftyn Behn, Vincent Dixie and Bo Mitchtell.

The primary election will be held on Oct. 7, and the general election scheduled for Dec. 2. 

Top Stories

ANOTHER PERMANT EXPANSION OF THE WELFARE STATE

…is coming after the shutdown is over

by Ralph Bristol

by Ralph Bristol, Facebook, Oct. 6, 2025- I reported earlier that my own Congressman, John Rose, as much as told Channel 5 he would vote to extent the “enhanced” Obamacare tax credits after the government reopens.  The capitulation doesn’t stop with at the lower ranks, with Rose. 

Rep. Mike Turner of Ohio, one of the top tier House Republicans has made it clear that his party will capitulate to Democrat demands on the Democrats’ enhanced Obamacare premium tax credits that Biden Democrats opened to incomes of all levels and increased the taxpayer subsidy in the American Rescue Plan, passed in 2021, after America no longer needed rescued from the Covid-19 crisis because President Trump’s “Operation Warp Speed,” in early 2020 to accelerate the development, manufacturing, and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics. 

By the time Biden Democrats passed the American Rescue Plan, which eliminated the 400% of the Federal Poverty Level ceiling and opened eligibility to the entire population, and increased the tax credits for those below 400% of FPL, the Covid-19 crisis was over the hump.  Both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were approved for emergency use shortly after the 2020 election, which saw the father of the vaccines defeated in the election and many of his followers turning against it, some of them dying, including two of my friends.

The country was not entirely back to normal when Democrats passed the American Rescue Plan, but it had made enough progress that no Republicans felt obligated to vote for that act or the follow-up Inflation Reduction Act, which was supposed to cure the inflation created by the $2.2 trillion Cares Act and the economic shut down, both under Trump, and Biden’s $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan. 

The world effectively suffered two pandemics simultaneously, one health, the other economic.  We responded to the deadly Covid-19 pandemic with a pandemic of economic shutdowns, which deprived the world of the products and services it needed, even as government flooded consumers with money to buy the products and services that could not be produced.

The resulting inflation could not be solved with even more government spending, including increased personal subsidies for healthcare, and massive subsidies for alternative energy, the two major pillars of the comically named “Inflation Reduction Act.”  One of the provisions of that act was to extend the tax credits created by the American Rescue Plan but only until the end of 2025. It was passed in August of 2022, when the unemployment rate stood at 3.7%.  Any “emergency” need for additional health insurance subsidies had long passed by then.  This was the third step in trying to expand a new welfare program, Obamacare, from two-thirds of the non-retired population to the entire population, a reach Obama himself found too far. 

To be clear, Obamacare is welfare.  Unlike Medicare, into which Americans pay a payroll tax during their entire working career before they are eligible for the insurance, and then still have to pay a sliding scale premium, Obamacare required no prior contribution to the program to be eligible, and the sliding scale premiums, for most enrollees, are as low or lower than the premiums for most Medicare enrollees.  

Obamacare is welfare. Have we now expanded welfare to eliminate any poverty requirement at all, not even 400% of FPL? We will if we open the enhanced Obamacare tax credits to the entire population.  What’s next? What will stop Democrats from allowing the entire population to buy groceries with food stamps. If healthcare is a right, certainly food is too!

Think of the possibilities.  Every year, when you file your taxes, you get a food stamp card in return.  Your card will be linked either to your bank account or your credit card of your choice and you will buy your groceries with the card.  If you make less than the FPL, you will pay nothing for the groceries, up to a certain amount each month.  If you make 200% of FPL, you will pay 50% percent of the price of the groceries and the store will automatically bill the government for the other 50%.  Your subsidy will decrease as your income, reported to the IRS, increases, and when you start making $250,000 a year or more, guess what happens?  

Thaaat’s right. Welcome to the era of means-tested grocery prices, because “food is a right,” and that means everyone should have the food they need, and those who can afford more should pay more so those who can only afford less can pay less. 

I almost forgot to tell you what the esteemed Congressman Mike Turner of Ohio had to say about extending the enhanced Obamacare subsidies when he was interviewed this weekend on the Chris Stirewalt Show on Seirus XM. 

Stirewalt: The Senate seems to be cooking up a deal that would include an extension of those (enhanced) Obamacare subsidies. That’s billions of dollars in order to reorder the government. Is that something you would support?

Turner: (After first insisting the shutdown was unrelated to the healthcare debate): “…now this debate over what is to occur in healthcare and these additional subsidies, as everybody has said, this does need to be addressed. It impacts my state and there are portions of these subsidies that do need to continue. They do impact families There are ways in which this needs to be addressed and I think this is an important debate. People have made a commitment that it should go forward, but this is completely unrelated – the fact that they have shut the government down in this shows they don’t have a plan….

Stirewalt did not press the issue.  

Yes, Democrats do have a plan, and their plan has apparently succeeded.  Soon, the Democrats will appear to have yielded.  Chuck Schumer will allow enough Democrats to vote for a clean bill that does not include an extension of the enhanced Obamacare tax credits, just as Republican insist.  The Republicans will have won the shutdown fight!  

Then, they will agree to a “new and improved” version of the enhanced Obamacare tax credits that still have a cutoff, although more generous than the Original Obamacare cutoff of 400% of FPL – probably 600%, since anything above that is going to be very little savings. 

And Republicans will prove that they can’t cut spending – except on illegal immigrants, which will get us nowhere – and the American welfare state will experience another permanent expansion – under the Republican’s watch. 

Our only hope now is that John Tamny is right, that too much spending and debt are not symptoms of a failing state – they are proof of a thriving economy!  This could not happen if America were not filthy rich and getting richer and all we need to do is concentrate on getting richer and we will be so rich that all the debt in the world won’t matter!

We can only hope – and maybe pray. That can’t hurt.

Ralph Bristol is the former long-time morning talk radio host broadcasting on Supertalk 99.7 WTN. He was one of the less provocative and bombastic of conservative radio personalities, more thoughtful and grounded in conservative ideas. He left talk radio in 2018 and retired. He lives in Nashville. 

Top Stories

Left-Wing Political Violence Reaches Record High

By James Lynch, National Review, September 26, 2025 - With the Democratic Party out of power and the Left’s dominance over American institutions facing severe challenges from the Trump administration, left-wing extremists have resorted to violence at rates unseen in decades, according to a new non-partisan study.

Left-wing terror plots and attacks, as a percentage of all terror plots and attacks, reached a record high in the first half of 2025, according to a non-partisan Center for Strategic and International Studies study released Thursday. If the trend persists, this year will see the highest number of left-wing terror plots and attacks on U.S. soil in more than three decades. (read  Left-Wing Political Violence Reaches Record High, Study Finds | National Review)

Top Stories

First Tuesday Presents Chief John Drake and Sheriff Daron Hall, Monday, Oct. 6.

 

Top Stories