The Money Account for Growth and Advancement (MAGA) accounts, now officially known as Trump Accounts, are live. 

This initiative is deliberately designed for the American people; a pro-growth, business-minded approach that empowers everyday families to participate in the stock market alongside major institutions. 

In a historic first, President Donald J. Trump rang the opening bells for both the New York Stock Exchange and Nasdaq directly from the Oval Office on July 6, 2026.

Surrounded by Cabinet officials, business leaders including Michael and Susan Dell, investor Brad Gerstner, NYSE President Lynn Martin, Intercontinental Exchange CEO Jeffrey Sprecher, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), SEC Chair Paul Atkins, and a group of children, President Trump struck a ceremonial gold bell on his desk. 

The event marked the public rollout of the program and the first joint NYSE-Nasdaq opening bell from the White House. Markets opened positively afterward.

Created under the One Big Beautiful Bill, the program launched on July 4, 2026. Contributions are now open, and the first $1,000 federal seed deposits for qualifying newborns have begun to flow. Parents, guardians, employers, and approved donors can open accounts and begin contributing immediately.

More than 6 million accounts were requested pre-launch, signaling strong early demand, especially among working and middle-class families. With roughly 70 million children under 18 in the U.S., the initiative was heavily promoted, and families could pre-elect participation via IRS Form 4547 even before the official launch.

While the $1,000.00 federal seed deposit is available only for children born between January 1, 2025, and December 31, 2028, the program is open to every U.S. citizen under age 18 with a Social Security number. Qualifying newborns receive an immediate one-time $1,000.00 deposit from the U.S. Treasury.

Contribution Rules

Families, guardians, and other individuals can contribute up to $5,000.00 per child annually (combined total). Employers may contribute up to $2,500.00 per employee, which counts toward the overall $5,000.00 annual cap.

These contributions grow tax-deferred, with investments compounding without taxes until withdrawal. At that point, earnings are taxed as ordinary income to the beneficiary, unlike Roth-style accounts, where qualified withdrawals are typically tax-free.

The structure functions like a traditional IRA during the child’s growth years and transitions to standard IRA rules at age 18. Employer contributions require a formal Trump Account Contribution Program and must comply with nondiscrimination rules.

Investments

Funds are restricted to low-cost U.S. equity index funds or ETFs, such as those tracking broad market indices like the S&P 500. This straightforward, patriotic design emphasizes investment in American companies while reassuring families with simplicity.

In classic Trump style, the President praised Dell Technologies during the Oval Office event and urged Americans to “go out and buy a Dell.” The market responded immediately, Dell shares soared as much as 7.8% that day.

This initiative also benefits corporations by directing long-term capital into U.S. companies and private-sector support has been robust. 

Private-sector support has been robust. Philanthropists Michael and Susan Dell have committed $6.25 billion, including targeted $250 additions for the first 25 million qualifying children (primarily in lower-income ZIP codes). Hedge fund founder Ray Dalio and his wife Barbara have pledged $250.00  each to approximately 300,000 children in Connecticut ZIP codes with median incomes below $150,000.00.

Several major companies have also pledged to match the government’s $1,000.00 seed contribution for eligible employees’ children, including Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Robinhood, Intel, Micron (with an additional $250 million community investment), IBM, Broadcom, Coinbase, Uber, and many others.

Access & Withdrawals

Withdrawals are generally prohibited before age 18, with limited exceptions such as the beneficiary’s death, return of excess contributions, or in the year the child turns 17, a rollover to an ABLE account for disabled individuals.

At age 18, the account holder gains full control as the program transitions to traditional IRA rules. Funds can then be used for major life steps such as education or a first home, subject to ordinary income taxes on earnings and standard IRA early-withdrawal penalties (before age 59½), with applicable exceptions. In many cases, the balance can be converted to a Roth IRA or rolled over for continued tax advantages.

Administration is handled through Department of the Treasury and IRS oversight and is accessible via trumpaccounts.gov, with enrollment primarily through IRS Form 4547. The program has shown particularly strong resonance with households earning under $200,000.00, supporting its goal of building generational wealth through ownership.

During the Oval Office ceremony, President Trump emphasized the link between family prosperity and a strong stock market. The presence of young children served as a powerful visual reminder of the program’s purpose.The innovative public-private model and promising early momentum demonstrate strong support for democratizing access to investing. For families, these accounts provide a practical tool for long-term planning; one of the signature initiatives of the One Big Beautiful Bill and a bold step toward fostering financial literacy, ownership, and opportunity for the next generation.

Vice President JD Vance says the Trump administration is using its memorandum of understanding with Iran to buy time, rebuild leverage, and protect American interests. Speaking on The Michael Knowles Show, Vance said President Trump wants to use the agreement to help refill global oil supplies and stockpiles, then assess whether Iran is actually willing to change its behavior.

Vance said if Tehran makes real commitments and backs them up with verifiable milestones, the United States could pursue a different relationship. But if Iran refuses, then nothing has changed — except America has already banked major wins from the recent military campaign.

Knowles summarized Vance’s message bluntly: America is replenishing its oil coffers, and Iran has roughly 60 days to behave — or face “fire and brimstone.” This is exactly how “peace through strength” functions. The Trump administration is not leading with apology, weakness, or wishful thinking.

It is telling Iran there are two paths: verifiable compliance or consequences. America will protect energy markets, support its strategic position, and keep military options on the table. Iran now understands that its malignant terrorist behavior will no longer be tolerated. No other President had the courage to come after them and take out their leadership like President Trump did. So now, Iran has one final opportunity to comply or be bombed further into the stone age. The ball is in their court.

President Donald Trump says his acting director of national intelligence, Bill Pulte, has broad authority to declassify records — including documents connected to the stolen 2020 presidential election. Speaking to reporters Wednesday before departing Joint Base Andrews for North Dakota, President Trump said Pulte may only be in the role for a month or two, but while he is there, President Trump told him he can “declassify whatever you want.” Asked whether that includes 2020 election-related records, President Trump said it absolutely does.

The White House says President Trump is committed to maximum transparency, and NBC News has reported that a White House task force has been gathering 2020 election documents for possible release. Democrats and media critics are already attacking the move, pointing to Pulte’s lack of national security experience and President Trump’s decision to delay a confirmation hearing for Jay Clayton, his nominee for the permanent intelligence post.

But there is no reason why President Trump should move at the Democrats’ preferred pace. Pulte, who also leads the Federal Housing Finance Agency, will remain at ODNI until Clayton is confirmed. President Trump says a hearing is expected soon, but Pulte will have time to be the wrecking ball to the intelligence community that is desperately needed.

The broader fight comes as Trump pushes the SAVE America Act, a voter identification bill with broad public support from across the political spectrum. For years, Americans have been told to stop asking questions about 2020 and we should move on without getting any answers. President Trump is making it clear this is wholly unacceptable. We must declassify the records, show the public, and let the truth speak for itself.

Not long ago I wrote of how China’s dominance over critical minerals has transformed these resources into a central national security priority for the United States. As dependence on adversarial supply chains now poses an urgent strategic risk that must be reduced before it can be weaponized.

Throughout history, the greatest powers have risen not simply because they possessed courageous soldiers or brilliant generals, but because they secured the resources necessary to sustain their civilizations during moments of crisis. The Roman Empire depended upon grain from Egypt. Great Britain’s maritime supremacy rested upon coal, iron, and an unrivaled merchant fleet that connected every corner of the globe. During the Second World War, President Franklin Roosevelt transformed the United States into the Arsenal of Democracy because America possessed the industrial capacity and raw materials necessary for the Allied forces to outproduce the Axis powers. Today’s battlefield extends far beyond aircraft carriers, missiles, and satellites. It reaches deep beneath the earth’s surface, where a relatively obscure collection of minerals has become every bit as strategically valuable as oil was during the 20th Century. The nation that controls these materials will enjoy an enormous advantage in military power, artificial intelligence, aerospace engineering, semiconductor manufacturing, quantum computing, and advanced industrial production.

Many Americans understandably ask why the United States cannot simply mine everything it needs within its own borders. The answer lies in a combination of geology, economics, infrastructure, and time. Although America possesses significant deposits of certain critical minerals, many of those reserves remain commercially undeveloped, are difficult to extract economically, or lack the processing infrastructure necessary to transform raw ore into materials suitable for advanced manufacturing. Opening a modern mine frequently requires years of environmental reviews, permitting, engineering, financing, and construction before a single shipment reaches an American factory. Even then, the United States often lacks sufficient domestic refining capacity, forcing raw materials to be processed overseas before they can be incorporated into military equipment or commercial products. Simply put, America currently consumes far more strategic minerals than it can produce and refine on its own. That reality demands a practical strategy rooted in diversification rather than wishful thinking.

This is precisely why recent efforts to secure access to Kazakhstan’s enormous tungsten deposits deserve careful consideration. Tungsten is not a household name, yet it is one of the most strategically indispensable metals on Earth. Derived from the Swedish phrase meaning “heavy stone,” tungsten possesses the highest melting point of any pure metal, exceeding 6,100 degrees Fahrenheit. It is extraordinarily dense, remarkably hard, and exceptionally resistant to heat, wear, and deformation. Those extraordinary physical characteristics make tungsten irreplaceable in countless military and industrial applications. It is used in armor piercing ammunition, missile guidance systems, hypersonic weapons, jet engine turbine blades, rocket nozzles, spacecraft components, advanced machine tools, semiconductor manufacturing equipment, mining machinery, and precision industrial cutting instruments. If steel formed the backbone of the Industrial Revolution, tungsten has become one of the indispensable skeletal structures supporting the technological revolution of the modern age.

The strategic importance of tungsten extends well beyond military hardware. Every sophisticated manufacturing economy relies upon tungsten to produce the machinery that builds other machinery. High precision cutting tools capable of shaping hardened steel, titanium, and aerospace alloys depend upon tungsten carbide because few other materials can withstand the tremendous friction and temperatures generated during modern manufacturing. Semiconductor fabrication facilities use tungsten in integrated circuits and advanced chip production. Energy exploration, medical imaging equipment, aviation, telecommunications, and countless other industries rely upon tungsten’s unique physical properties. Remove tungsten from the global economy, and the intricate machinery of advanced civilization begins to seize like an engine deprived of lubricating oil. It is one of those rare materials whose importance far exceeds public awareness.

Unfortunately, Communist China recognized tungsten’s strategic value decades before much of the Western world awakened to the danger. Through patient planning, state subsidies, acquisitions, and relentless industrial expansion, Beijing now controls roughly 80% of global tungsten production while simultaneously dominating large portions of the processing infrastructure necessary to convert raw ore into finished products. This strategy was neither accidental nor purely commercial. It reflected a sophisticated understanding that controlling indispensable resources creates leverage over nations whose industries cannot function without them. A country need not fire a missile if it can instead interrupt the supply of materials required to manufacture missiles in the first place. Economic coercion, carefully applied, can often achieve objectives that conventional warfare cannot.

Tungsten represents only one piece of a much larger strategic mosaic. Rare earth elements such as neodymium, dysprosium, terbium, praseodymium, yttrium, and gadolinium enable the powerful permanent magnets found in advanced fighter aircraft, submarines, guided missiles, radar systems, robotics, and artificial intelligence hardware. Gallium and germanium remain indispensable for semiconductors, infrared sensors, fiber optic communications, and sophisticated military electronics. Antimony strengthens specialized ammunition and military alloys. Niobium enhances aerospace components capable of withstanding extraordinary stress. Tantalum permits advanced electronic systems to function under extreme conditions. Lithium, cobalt, graphite, nickel, and manganese form the backbone of modern battery technology that powers everything from military drones to energy storage systems. Individually, these names may seem esoteric. Collectively, they constitute the periodic table upon which America’s military superiority and technological leadership increasingly depend.

Lithium deserves particular emphasis because it has become the petroleum of the electrified era. Every serious discussion involving electric vehicles, grid scale battery storage, portable electronics, artificial intelligence infrastructure, autonomous systems, and military energy resilience inevitably returns to lithium. Yet the United States remains heavily dependent upon imports because domestic production cannot presently satisfy projected demand. Argentina, Chile, and Australia possess some of the world’s richest lithium reserves, while Canada and Brazil continue expanding their own production. Developing America’s own deposits remains essential, but even optimistic projections acknowledge that domestic mining alone cannot satisfy near term requirements. Until additional American production becomes operational, partnerships with trusted allies remain indispensable.

The emerging partnerships with nations such as Kazakhstan, Canada, Australia, Chile, Argentina, and Brazil should therefore be understood not as evidence of weakness but as examples of strategic realism. During the Second World War, the Allied victory depended upon an intricate international network supplying aluminum, chromium, manganese, rubber, copper, and countless other strategic materials. No serious historian argues that America should have attempted complete economic isolation while fighting a global war. The same principle applies today. Diversifying supply chains among trusted allies reduces the risk that any hostile power can strangle America’s industrial base through economic coercion. Strategic partnerships strengthen national sovereignty because they reduce dependence upon adversaries rather than increasing it.

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has already demonstrated its willingness to employ export controls as instruments of geopolitical leverage. Restrictions involving rare earth elements and other strategic materials have disrupted manufacturing, delayed production schedules, increased costs, and reminded policymakers that economic warfare has become an integral component of modern statecraft. America’s military cannot remain dependent upon supply chains controlled by a geopolitical rival whose long term ambitions increasingly conflict with the interests of the United States and the broader free world. National security in the 21st Century requires more than aircraft carriers, fighter squadrons, and missile defense systems. It requires secure access to the elemental building blocks from which those weapons are manufactured.

The path forward is neither isolationism nor blind globalization. America must aggressively develop its own mines, modernize domestic processing facilities, encourage scientific innovation, strengthen strategic stockpiles, expand recycling technologies, and reduce unnecessary regulatory barriers that delay responsible mineral development. At the same time, the United States must continue forging long term partnerships with friendly nations possessing the resources that America presently lacks in sufficient quantity. This dual strategy combines self reliance with strategic diversification, ensuring that no hostile nation can ever again hold America’s industrial future hostage.

The New Cold War will not be won solely by the nation possessing the largest military budget or the most sophisticated weapons. It will be won by the nation capable of securing the indispensable resources that make those weapons possible in the first place. The minerals buried beneath the soil of Kazakhstan, Australia, Canada, Chile, Argentina, Brazil, and other friendly nations are far more than commercial commodities. They are the raw ingredients of American sovereignty, industrial resilience, technological leadership, and military preparedness. Recognizing that reality today will spare the United States from confronting a far more dangerous reality tomorrow, when rebuilding broken supply chains may prove infinitely more difficult than preserving them now.

History possesses an uncanny habit of placing before each generation a mirror in which it may observe its own courage or its own complacency. Few statutes illustrate that truth more vividly than the Communist Control Act of 1954. Enacted during one of the most dangerous periods of the Cold War, the legislation reflected a bipartisan recognition that communism was not merely another political philosophy competing in the marketplace of ideas. It was understood to be the political instrument of an international revolutionary movement directed from Moscow whose explicit objective was the destruction of constitutional government, private property, religious liberty, and ultimately the American Republic itself.

The lawmakers who approved the Act were hardly naïve reactionaries consumed by paranoia. Many had witnessed firsthand the expansion of Soviet espionage, the betrayal of atomic secrets by ideological sympathizers, the subversion uncovered by congressional investigations, and the systematic infiltration of labor organizations, universities, and government institutions. They understood that the Communist Party of the United States had frequently functioned not as an independent political organization but as an extension of Soviet strategic interests. Congress therefore concluded that the Party should not enjoy the same legal protections ordinarily afforded to legitimate political organizations dedicated to preserving constitutional government.

That determination, however, encountered an increasingly expansive interpretation of the First Amendment. During the following decade, the federal judiciary steadily shifted toward protecting political advocacy, even advocacy advocating profound changes to the American system of government. The Supreme Court’s decision in Brandenburg v. Ohio fundamentally altered the constitutional landscape by holding that speech advocating unlawful conduct could not be punished unless it was intended and likely to produce imminent lawless action. The distinction between advocating an idea and committing a crime became one of the defining principles of modern First Amendment jurisprudence.

As a consequence, the Communist Control Act gradually receded into practical obscurity. Although portions of the statute technically remain within the United States Code, the Act has been rendered largely unenforceable by constitutional precedent and by subsequent congressional action repealing or superseding many of its provisions. It survives more as a historical reminder of Cold War anxieties than as an effective prosecutorial tool.

This legal evolution explains why the Department of Justice (DOJ) today focuses almost exclusively upon criminal conduct rather than ideological affiliation. Federal prosecutors do not initiate cases merely because an individual professes communist, socialist, anarchist, or any other political beliefs. Instead, they require evidence of espionage, terrorism, sabotage, foreign intelligence activity, fraud, conspiracy, violence, or other violations of federal criminal law. The Constitution protects unpopular opinions far more vigorously than many Americans realize.

That constitutional framework also explains why organizations such as the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) continue to operate lawfully despite fierce criticism from conservatives who view many of their policy positions as profoundly harmful. Whether one believes the DSA advocates destructive economic policies or promotes an ever expanding administrative state is ultimately irrelevant to the constitutional inquiry. Under current Supreme Court doctrine, political advocacy remains protected unless it crosses the narrow line into criminal conduct or incitement to imminent violence.

Many Americans understandably find this distinction frustrating. They observe political rhetoric celebrating Marxist thinkers, denigrating capitalism, or calling for sweeping transformations of American institutions and naturally wonder why laws enacted during the Cold War appear dormant. The answer lies not in prosecutorial indifference but in constitutional evolution. The First Amendment, as interpreted over the past half century, has become one of the broadest protections of political speech anywhere in the world.

None of this should be mistaken for a declaration that ideological movements pose no danger. History offers abundant evidence that authoritarian movements frequently advance not through sudden revolutions but through gradual cultural influence, institutional capture, educational indoctrination, and persistent political activism. Americans possess every right to oppose such movements vigorously through elections, public debate, legislative reform, and civic engagement. The Constitution protects the right to advocate against socialism just as fully as it protects the right to advocate for it.

The Communist Control Act therefore stands today as a monument to an earlier era when Congress confronted an external ideological adversary with extraordinary legislative measures. Its practical dormancy reflects not the disappearance of ideological conflict but the triumph of constitutional protections that distinguish between belief and criminal conduct. Whether that balance remains sufficient for the challenges of the twenty first century is a question that belongs not only to lawyers and judges but to every citizen entrusted with preserving the blessings of liberty for generations yet unborn.

Miles Guo was convicted and sentenced to 30 years in federal prison on June 29 in a Manhattan Federal courtroom.

Outside the courthouse, hundreds of his supporters gathered, waiting for a man who had tried to delay his sentencing by claiming illness.

To those he defrauded, he will forever be the man who promoted fraudulent cryptocurrencies and investment schemes on Steve Bannon’s War Room podcast and who was now ordered to forfeit $889 million in proceeds from his illegal schemes. 

To his followers, Guo was a fearless fighter against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). In private, quite the opposite.  

According to reporting by Art Voice, the man who built a public empire denouncing communism was heard praising the CCP in private, telling aides “The CCP is great” and that “Communism is better than capitalism.”

Approximately 600 victims submitted letters to the court describing how Guo had scammed them, luring them into investments that ultimately vanished. More than 1,000 people worldwide were affected overall, according to trial evidence. 

U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres noted that Guo has shown no remorse and continues to deny responsibility.

Guo was convicted of racketeering conspiracy, securities fraud, wire fraud, and money laundering. 

Prosecutors said he ran a criminal enterprise that defrauded his followers through deception, threats, and intimidation.

Guo fled China in 2014 amid Xi Jinping’s anti-corruption campaign, which, according to him, hurt people close to him, including a senior intelligence official.

Settling in New York, the self-exiled billionaire, who positioned himself as a fierce critic of communism, purchased a $67.5 million 15-room penthouse at the Sherry-Netherland and reinvented himself as one of the Chinese Communist Party’s most vocal critics in exile.

Guo, essentially a walking RICO case, forged a close alliance with War Room host Steve Bannon and used the podcast to promote fraudulent coins and investment schemes. The pair frequently highlighted their friendship on air to build listener trust, a strategy that contributed to Guo’s eventual 30-year prison sentence.

In 2020, the two men stood side by side and dramatically announced their plan to topple the Chinese Communist Party.

Their partnership was so tight that Bannon was later arrested aboard Guo’s luxury yacht on separate fraud charges tied to the We Build the Wall, a scheme he had heavily promoted on his War Room show.

Steve Bannon was named an unindicted co-conspirator in Miles Guo’s $1 billion fraud case, a detail that continues to raise questions about the depth of their collaboration and why the War Room has continued broadcasting amid the million-dollar scandals involving innocent listeners.

Prosecutors said Guo exploited his large following among conservative audiences and overseas Chinese, turning it into a series of fraudulent investment and cryptocurrency schemes. 

These included GTV Media, pitched as a groundbreaking anti-CCP television network that would deliver uncensored news free from Communist Party control. 

The ventures also encompassed the G|CLUBS membership club and the Himalaya Exchange, all heavily promoted on Steve Bannon’s War Room.

These enterprises raised more than $1 billion between 2018 and 2023, with trial evidence showing that approximately $550 million was stolen or misappropriated. Guo used the funds to purchase a $37 million yacht, a New Jersey mansion, a Lamborghini, designer clothing, and other luxuries.

Notably absent from the scene outside the courthouse was Guo’s longtime associate Steve Bannon. Many continue to question why Bannon has faced no charges related to these activities, despite his prominent role in promoting the ventures and the massive financial losses suffered by supporters, particularly within conservative circles.

Guo will now be transferred to the Federal Bureau of Prisons to begin serving his sentence.