A New Jersey police officer is in custody after allegedly committing a violent home invasion and assault on two victims Friday night. The accused is Rebecca A. Sayegh, a 32-year-old Toms River police officer, who was off duty at the time of the incident. Sayegh, a decorated officer known for her heroism in rescuing a woman and her pets from a burning house, is now facing multiple serious charges.

Around 11:30 p.m., Sayegh reportedly smashed the front glass door of a home in Berkeley Township and forced her way inside. Once inside, she is said to have physically attacked and threatened the two residents. Authorities also allege that prior to the break-in, she damaged one of the victim’s vehicles parked outside.

The reasons behind the violent outburst are unclear, and it’s unknown whether Sayegh had any prior relationship with the victims. The Ocean County Prosecutor’s Office described the incident as a “domestic disturbance,” though no further details have been shared at this time.

Sayegh allegedly resisted arrest when officers arrived, but she was eventually taken into custody. She faces multiple charges, including home invasion burglary, assault, criminal mischief, terroristic threats, and resisting arrest. She is currently being held in Ocean County Jail pending a detention hearing.

Sayegh’s arrest is a dramatic fall from grace for the officer, who was honored just months ago for her bravery. However, her legal and professional situation has been complicated by a lawsuit she filed against her department. In the suit, Sayegh accused the Toms River Police Department of fostering a “boys club” culture that led to sexual harassment and career discrimination. This case had already drawn attention, raising concerns about how the department handles internal issues.

The future of Officer Sayegh’s career and legal battles now appears uncertain, as she faces serious criminal charges on top of her ongoing discrimination lawsuit. The case is expected to raise additional questions about the accountability of law enforcement and whether officers are adequately supported or screened before incidents like this occur. Investigations are still ongoing, and more details are expected to emerge in the coming days.

Scroll down to leave a comment and share your thoughts.

A brief experiment by Amazon quickly turned into a political firestorm on Tuesday, as the company was forced to backtrack on a controversial pricing proposal that critics saw as an attack on President Trump’s economic policies.

Amazon had briefly considered listing tariff-related costs alongside product prices, a move that Trump’s supporters quickly condemned as a political statement meant to undermine the President’s trade agenda. Within hours, the backlash was intense, and the company reversed course.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt led the charge, using her morning briefing to accuse Amazon of deliberately manipulating consumer perceptions by highlighting the impact of tariffs on product prices. She questioned why such a proposal wasn’t considered under the Biden administration and called it a “deliberate act of manipulation.”

An Amazon spokesperson clarified that no action had been taken to implement the idea, explaining that it was just something considered by a team in the Amazon Haul division for certain products, but it was never rolled out.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent also weighed in, defending the Trump administration’s trade strategy and pointing to signs that China’s economy was on the brink of collapse unless they struck a new deal. He suggested that China could lose millions of jobs due to the economic strain of the tariffs.

The controversy began when Punchbowl News reported that Amazon was exploring adding tariff-related breakdowns to product prices, which many saw as an attempt to emphasize rising consumer costs and sow doubt about the effectiveness of Trump’s trade policies.

Leavitt didn’t hold back, attacking Amazon’s leadership for its past actions, including accusations that Amazon had cooperated with Chinese officials to suppress reviews and content on its Chinese platform. She labeled the company’s behavior “treasonous” and drew attention to Amazon’s controversial stance during the Biden administration.

As Trump’s team increasingly focuses on trade and tariffs in his political messaging, Leavitt reinforced the idea that Trump’s economic policies were a key factor in his re-election.

Despite his past donations to Trump’s inaugural fund, Amazon’s founder Jeff Bezos has faced criticism from all sides, with reports suggesting he pushed his Washington Post to adopt a more conservative editorial line. The backlash over the tariff pricing proposal highlights how sensitive the nation has become to economic messaging, with even small changes in how companies frame costs triggering national debate.

Scroll down to leave a comment and share your thoughts.

A leading pollster is calling out mainstream media outlets for pushing what he says is another round of biased, misleading polling — this time targeting President Trump’s first 100 days in office.

Richard Baris, director of Big Data Poll, says the same polling firms that were wrong in 2024 are once again relying on flawed methods to shape a negative public narrative. Speaking on “Just the News, No Noise,” Baris argued that these polls are more about political messaging than real public opinion.

“We saw bad polling before the election, and they’re doing it again now with Trump’s 100 days,” Baris said. “They were wrong then, and they’re wrong now.”

Recent surveys from ABC News/Washington Post and CNN show Trump with low approval ratings — with one poll claiming 55% disapprove of his performance and another placing his approval at just 41%. The media quickly latched onto these numbers to paint a picture of chaos and public dissatisfaction.

But Baris says that picture is distorted. According to him, these polls continue to underrepresent Trump supporters, particularly in rural areas, and rely too heavily on urban samples. He claims they also use manipulative question wording to produce more negative responses.

“These pollsters were five to seven points off in 2024,” Baris noted. “And they’re still off by that much today. It’s clear nothing has changed.”

He also pointed to a recent New York Times/Siena poll that described Trump’s presidency as “chaotic” and “scary” — labels that many conservatives argue are more editorial than factual.

Baris warns that the media’s repeated misuse of polling data is not only misleading voters but also damaging the credibility of the polling industry itself. He believes this is part of a broader strategy to create fear and doubt among undecided voters.

“If pollsters don’t fix these problems, they risk becoming irrelevant,” he said. “People aren’t buying it anymore.”

With the 2028 race beginning to heat up, Trump’s allies are pushing back harder against what they see as an effort to control public perception. Baris’s comments are fueling that resistance — and raising fresh questions about whether polling can still be trusted in the age of political warfare.

Scroll down to leave a comment and share your thoughts.