Muscular Trump ally unveils dramatic new tattoo showing off his undying patriotism
Congressman Cory Mills has gotten a dramatic new tattoo showing off his patriotic side.
The Florida Republican has added a colorful display showing off the nation's Capitol on his arm, according to a picture of the new ink shared with the Daily Mail.
Featuring the dome of the US Capitol building in front of clouds and a shimmering sun, Mill's tattoo also features the first three words of the Constitution: 'We the People.'
The display on the congressman's forearm is done in white and black shading with some red throughout, including for the coloring of waving American flag on the Capitol's roof.
Mills, 44, is a US military veteran who served in the Army's airborne division and then earned a fortune in the private security industry.
He coordinated civilian evacuations from Afghanistan in 2021 and Haiti in 2024.
Mills is one to dive into danger, he previously jumped out of a plane in France for D-Day celebration.
And he was given a prime seat by President Trump at the Army's 250th anniversary parade over the weekend.
The new ink, he told the Daily Mail, is an extension of his Christian faith and patriotism.
'The Capitol dome is the center point of our nation's Capitol. Above the Speaker's chair in the House is proudly displayed, 'In God We Trust',' he told the Daily Mail in a statement.
The Capitol tattoo accompanies a piece on Mill's shoulder showing St. Michael slaying a dragon. The two tattoos have deep spiritual meaning for Mills, he has said
'Our constitution was written with our Christian Judeo faith in mind, and to preserve our rights from tyranny.'
'It's a place I came to continue my service in the fight for freedom and the ongoing battle of good vs evil.'
The Capitol tattoo compliments another scene on Mills' shoulder, which was meant to cover up an older piece on his arm.
'I had my Rosary beads since about 2000 that I paid $100 to get,' Mills told the Daily Mail of his now covered up ink. He said it faded due to sun exposure time.
'My Archangel Michael (done in 2024) was a bit of a coverup on the original tattoo but keeping me grounded in my faith. Reminding me we are always in a battle of good vs evil.'
The tattoo comes after questions over Mill's faith came to the forefront last month after a report indicated that the Republican was married in a ceremony overseen by an Islamic teacher with ties to extremism.
Mills married his soon-to-be ex-wife, Rana Al Saadi, a naturalized American from Iraq, in 2014 at the Dar Al-Hijirah Islamic Center in Falls Church.
The two were wed by Mohammad Al-Hanooti, who was reportedly an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
Reports indicate that Al-Hanooti, born in Palestine in 1937, was a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and a fundraiser for Hamas.
Though Mills pushed back saying the Islamic ceremony was necessary so his wife could go home to Iraq to visit an ailing relative.
She 'would've been arrested' without documentation of her religious marriage to Mills, the congressman told The Blaze, the outlet who first reported on Mills' wedding ceremony.
The congressman has said he is a practicing Christian.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
9 minutes ago
- Reuters
US Supreme Court upholds law on suing Palestinian authorities over attacks
WASHINGTON, June 20 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court upheld on Friday a statute passed by Congress to facilitate lawsuits against Palestinian authorities by Americans killed or injured in attacks abroad as plaintiffs pursue monetary damages for violence years ago in Israel and the West Bank. The 9-0 ruling overturned a lower court's decision that the 2019 law, the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act, violated the rights of the Palestinian Authority and Palestine Liberation Organization to due process under the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. government and a group of American victims and their families had appealed the lower court's decision that struck down a provision of the law. Among the plaintiffs are families who in 2015 won a $655 million judgment in a civil case alleging that the Palestinian organizations were responsible for a series of shootings and bombings around Jerusalem from 2002 to 2004. They also include relatives of Ari Fuld, a Jewish settler in the Israel-occupied West Bank who was fatally stabbed by a Palestinian in 2018. The ongoing violence involving Israel and the Palestinians served as a backdrop to the case. U.S. courts for years have grappled over whether they have jurisdiction in cases involving the Palestinian Authority and PLO for actions taken abroad. Under the language at issue in the 2019 law, the PLO and Palestinian Authority automatically "consent" to jurisdiction if they conduct certain activities in the United States or make payments to people who attack Americans. New York-based U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman ruled in 2022 that the law violated the due process rights of the PLO and Palestinian Authority guaranteed under the Constitution. The New York-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling. President Joe Biden's administration initiated the government's appeal, which subsequently was taken up by President Donald Trump's administration. The Supreme Court heard arguments in the case on April 1.
NBC News
10 minutes ago
- NBC News
Vance to travel to Los Angeles
Vice President JD Vance will travel to Los Angeles on Friday for a visit to a city where clashes between protesters and law enforcement officials have become a focal point of the opposition to the Trump administration's immigration agenda. While in Los Angeles, Vance is expected to deliver remarks as well as tour federal facilities, including a mobile command center and meet with Marines. Vance's visit to the city is the latest in the battle between Democrats and the Trump administration over its hardline deportation policies after an appeals court ruled in the president's favor Thursday. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that it's "likely that the President lawfully exercised his statutory authority" in deploying California National Guard troops to respond to protests in L.A. The decision stemmed from the lawsuit California Attorney General Rob Bonta brought against the Trump administration after Trump sent the troops to the city without the approval of Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom. On Wednesday, U.S. Northern Command said that it was activating 2,000 additional National Guard troops in L.A. to 'support the protection of federal functions, personnel, and property in the greater Los Angeles area.' That brings the total number of National Guard troops deployed to the city to more than 4,000 since the protests erupted there earlier this month. The president also deployed U.S. Marines to assist law enforcement in the response to demonstrations. The president's and administration's immigration actions have sparked outrage among Democratic lawmakers, including California Sen. Alex Padilla, who was forcibly removed and handcuffed after he tried to question Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem in a briefing last week. The protests formed after ICE agents raided three places in central L.A. in early June, triggering a domino effect of similar demonstrations nationwide. While they've dissipated in recent weeks, one began on Thursday when federal agents working with ICE came to Dodgers Stadium 'requested permission to access the parking lots.' The Major League Baseball team, however, said that it blocked immigration agents from entering the ballpark.
The Independent
13 minutes ago
- The Independent
Judge rules Trump administration can't require states to help on immigration to get transport money
A federal judge on Thursday blocked the Trump administration from withholding billions of dollars in transportation funds from states that don't agree to participate in some immigration enforcement actions. Twenty states sued after they said Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy threatened to cut off funding to states that refused to comply with President Donald Trump's immigration agenda. U.S. District Judge John McConnell Jr. barred federal transportation officials from carrying out that threat before the lawsuit is fully resolved. 'The Court finds that the States have demonstrated they will face irreparable and continuing harm if forced to agree to Defendants' unlawful and unconstitutional immigration conditions imposed in order to receive federal transportation grant funds,' wrote McConnell, the chief judge for the federal district of Rhode island. 'The States face losing billions of dollars in federal funding, are being put in a position of relinquishing their sovereign right to decide how to use their own police officers, are at risk of losing the trust built between local law enforcement and immigrant communities, and will have to scale back, reconsider, or cancel ongoing transportation projects.' On April 24, states received letters from the Department of Transportation stating that they must cooperate on immigration efforts or risk losing the congressionally appropriated funds. No funding was immediately withheld, but some of the states feared the move was imminent. Attorneys general from California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, Wisconsin and Vermont filed the lawsuit in May, saying the new so-called 'Duffy Directive' put them in an impossible position. 'The States can either attempt to comply with an unlawful and unconstitutional condition that would surrender their sovereign control over their own law enforcement officers and reduce immigrants' willingness to report crimes and participate in public health programs — or they can forfeit tens of billions of dollars of funds they rely on regularly to support the roads, highways, railways, airways, ferries, and bridges that connect their communities and homes,' the attorneys general wrote in court documents. But acting Rhode Island U.S. Attorney Sara Miron Bloom told the judge that Congress has given the Department of Transportation the legal right to set conditions for the grant money it administers to states, and that requiring compliance and cooperation with federal law enforcement is a reasonable exercise of that discretion. Allowing the federal government to withhold the funds while the lawsuit moves forward doesn't cause any lasting harm, Bloom wrote in court documents, because that money can always be disbursed later if needed. But requiring the federal government to release the money to uncooperative states will likely make it impossible to recoup later, if the Department of Transportation wins the case, Bloom said.
