•Planned Parenthood Closes Five Northern California Centers •New Poll Shows Percentage of Americans Who are Pro-Life Jumps 7% •Woman Gives Birth to Stillborn Baby, Throws Baby in the Dumpster •After Killing 65 Million Babies in Abortions, US Fertility Rate Hits All-Time Low •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Heartfelt Media Group is calling on singers of all backgrounds to record themselves as part of a virtual community chorus for an upcoming song release affirming the sanctity of life. For more details or to receive a demo, visit https://rescue.heartfeltmg.com “
Not only is the U.S. failing to create enough new Americans through birth — it is also failing to turn immigrants into Americans in any meaningful sense.
“First world nations are dying,” Pat Buchanan warned in his 2002 book The Death of the West. “They face a mortal crisis, not because of something happening in the Third World, but because of what is not happening at home and in the homes of the First World.”
And what was not — and still is not — happening at home is childbearing. Buchanan was referring to fertility rates, which have been on the decline for decades.
Data released on Thursday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) shows U.S. birth rates are dropping to levels of civilizational suicide, with women having on average 1.6 children. According to the CDC data, birth rates dropped for women aged 15-34 between 2023 and 2024 while rising for women aged 40-44. The general fertility rate (GFR), which is the number of births per 1,000 females ages 15-44, “is down 22% from 2007 to 2024.” While fertility rates are down, the number of births increased by roughly 1 percent between 2023 and 2024, according to the data.
Women are delaying having children or completely casting it aside — thanks in part to the rise of the obnoxious hyper-independent girl boss mentality that has asserted that marriage and motherhood are shackles, along with the “loss of religiosity” and “availability of birth control” and abortion, as pointed out in these pages by David Harsanyi.
The result? The country is dying.
As Buchanan warned, a nation that will not reproduce will not survive. A shrinking native population leads to one inevitable outcome: mass immigration.
As noted by The Heritage Foundation’s Jonathan Abbamonte, “without a substantial increase in fertility, the United States will continue to be increasingly dependent on immigration to slow down population ageing and prevent population contraction.”
One of the most obvious results of a shrinking population is a shrinking workforce. But a workforce is rather interchangeable. A country can always import labor — the United States can import labor for the foreseeable future if there is a shortage of workers. But what a country cannot import is a culture, a heritage, a set of particular values that will help the republic endure.
America simply cannot outsource her future to people from other places. And it’s not about “xenophobia” or whatever other “phobia” the left will throw at Americans. A country — any country — that replaces its population with people from somewhere else because its own people will not reproduce becomes something else entirely. If we don’t make more Americans, we won’t have any more left. And without Americans, there will be no America.
Not only is the U.S. failing to create enough new Americans through birth — it is also failing to turn immigrants into Americans in any meaningful sense — making the prospect of boosting the dying population with foreigners even more problematic. Of course, this hasn’t always been the case. In the 19th and 20th centuries, the U.S. successfully assimilated millions of immigrants — Germans, Italians, Poles, Irish, and so on and so forth — because they shared a foundation of similar cultural and social norms, values, and religion. They often became Americans within a single generation.
But since the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act, that assimilation process has broken down. America has seen a wave of mass migration from nations that are dissimilar to it. Different languages, cultures, religions, and political philosophies are all things that act as barriers to assimilation. And the one thing that could ease the assimilation process has been undermined by the left — that thing being a shared national identity. The left abhors American exceptionalism. They demonize it, teaching children and young adults that America is an evil place that must atone for her sins. So how are we supposed to assimilate foreigners into America’s culture and way of life when we ourselves have vilified and rejected our own heritage?
American birth rates have now dropped to levels of civilizational suicide. And in the vacuum left by a people that won’t reproduce, another people will — but they won’t be American.
Brianna Lyman is an elections correspondent at The Federalist. Brianna graduated from Fordham University with a degree in International Political Economy. Her work has been featured on Newsmax, Fox News, Fox Business and RealClearPolitics. Follow Brianna on X: @briannalyman2
White House Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard talks to reporters in the Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House on July 23, 2025, in Washington, D.C. Gabbard released a 2017 report from the House Permanent Committee on Intelligence that she says undermines the conclusion of intelligence agencies during the Obama administration that Russia favored the election of Donald J. Trump in 2016. | Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
This week’s news cycle erupted after Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard recently declassified documents that allegedly show former President Barack Obama and members of his administration laid the groundwork for the years-long “Russiagate” investigation that snarled much of President Donald Trump’s first term. Trump has since accused his predecessor of treason for attempting to subvert his electoral victory in the 2016 presidential election by undermining his administration with a political hoax suggesting Russia collusion.
Gabbard has stopped short of overtly accusing Obama of treason but noted Wednesday that she has referred evidence to the U.S. Department of Justice that could lead to his criminal prosecution.
Here are five key takeaways from the developing story.
1. ‘Years-long coup’
On July 18, Gabbard declassified more than 100 documents, including memos and emails, that she claimed provided “overwhelming evidence” that the Obama administration conspired to manufacture and politically weaponize false intelligence.
In a lengthy X thread, Gabbard alleged that after Trump’s 2016 victory, Obama and his national security team — including officials such as James Clapper, John Brennan and James Comey — were involved in producing the intelligence claiming Russians interfered in the 2016 presidential election to favor Trump, which was then leaked to the media to undermine his presidency.
🧵 Americans will finally learn the truth about how in 2016, intelligence was politicized and weaponized by the most powerful people in the Obama Administration to lay the groundwork for what was essentially a years-long coup against President @realDonaldTrump, subverting the… pic.twitter.com/UQKKZ5c4Op
“Americans will finally learn the truth about how in 2016, intelligence was politicized and weaponized by the most powerful people in the Obama administration to lay the groundwork for what was essentially a years-long coup against President [Trump], subverting the will of the American people and undermining our democratic republic,” Gabbard wrote.
Gabbard claimed that despite assessments from the intelligence community that Russia was not trying to steal the election, Obama personally directed the creation of a new assessment to push a false narrative.
During an appearance in the White House press briefing room Wednesday afternoon, Gabbard reiterated her assertions but declined to accuse the former president of treason, a potentially capital crime.
“I’m leaving the criminal charges to the Department of Justice,” Gabbard said, adding, “The expressed intent and what followed afterward can only be described as a years-long coup and a treasonous conspiracy against the American people, our republic and an attempt to undermine President Trump’s administration.”
🚨 BREAKING: Tulsi Gabbard announces she has officially referred Barack Obama to the DOJ for CRIMINAL PROSECUTION
"The evidence that we have found and that we have released directly point to President Obama leading the manufacturing of this intelligence assessment.
Former CIA Director John Brennan overruled senior intelligence officials who raised concerns regarding the key claim in the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) that Russia intervened in the 2016 presidential election to help Trump, according to documents reviewed by reporter Mollie Hemingway at The Federalist.
Intelligence experts within the CIA, FBI and Office of the Director of National Intelligence expressed concerns during the drafting of the ICA, noting there was no direct intelligence to substantiate its claim. Despite objections, Brennan reportedly dismissed such concerns during a heated meeting on Dec. 30, 2016.
A subsequent CIA review criticized the ICA’s rushed timeline, limited access to underlying intelligence and the inflated confidence level assigned to it despite reservations from top officials.
The records also indicated Brennan selectively shared the intelligence with Congress, which prompted skepticism from then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who came to believe it was politically motivated and an attempt to undermine Trump.
3. Trump accuses Obama of treason: ‘They did things that nobody’s ever even imagined’
During a press gaggle in the Oval Office on Tuesday with the Philippine president, Trump escalated his rhetoric by accusing Obama of treason, which prompted a rare statement from Obama’s spokesperson.
Trump accused Obama of being the “ringleader” in the attempt to subvert the 2016 presidential election with weaponized, manufactured intelligence, but said he has been “shielded by the press for his entire life.”
“It was President Obama,” Trump said regarding Russiagate. “It wasn’t lots of people all over the place — it was them, too — but the leader of the gang was President Obama, Barack Hussein Obama. Have you heard of him?”
“Look, he’s guilty. It’s not a question. … It’s there. He’s guilty. This was treason. This was every word you can think of.”
“They tried to steal the election; they tried to obfuscate the election. They did things that nobody’s ever even imagined, even in other countries,” Trump said.
Trump added that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also played a major role, and that Gabbard has “thousands of additional documents coming,” which he suggested will further incriminate the Obama administration.
“So, President Obama, it was his concept — his idea,” Trump said. “But he also got it from crooked Hillary Clinton — crooked as a $3 bill, and Hillary Clinton and her group, the Democrats, spent $12 million to Christopher Steele to write up a report that was a total fake report.”
4. Obama spokesperson pushes back: ‘Weak attempt at distraction’
Obama’s spokesman Patrick Rodenbush issued an unusual scathing statement in the wake of Trump’s claims, which he dismissed as “bizarre” and “ridiculous” without denying them.
BREAKING 🚨 Statement issued from the Office of President Obama:
"Out of respect for the office of the presidency, our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response. But these claims are outrageous…
“Out of respect for the office of the presidency, our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response,” Rodenbush said. “But these claims are outrageous enough to merit one.”
“These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction,” Obama’s spokesman continued. “Nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes.”
“These findings were affirmed in a 2020 report by the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee, led by then-Chairman Marco Rubio,” he added.
5. House Speaker Mike Johnson floats potential Obama subpoena: ‘Sinister plot’
House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., maintained that the Obama administration has done immense damage to the public trust by participating in what he described as “a sinister plot.”
Speaking to CBN reporter David Brody in an interview published Monday, Johnson also suggested congressional subpoenas for the former president and members of his administration may be incoming.
JUST IN: Speaker Johnson tells me says he has no concern at all about bringing Former President Barack Obama in for a congressional deposition or subpoena over the newly declassified documents bombshell. "If it's uncomfortable for him, he shouldn't have been involved in… pic.twitter.com/hAeVHdYt4m
“I think we have a responsibility to follow the truth, where it leads,” Johnson said. “To do effectively the opposite of what that other team did — they were engaged in a partisan political plot to take down their foe in the other party. We need to be about the rule of law and bring an order to the chaos and searching out the truth because the American people are owed those answers.”
Johnson expressed no sympathy for Obama potentially being dragged into a criminal investigation.
“If it’s uncomfortable for him, he shouldn’t have been involved in overseeing this, which is what it appears to us has happened,” he said.
•Planned Parenthood Will Permanently Close Indiana Center •World’s Most Premature Baby Born at 21 Weeks Celebrates His First Birthday •HHS Secretary Will Stop Hospitals Harvesting Organs From Living Patients •Charges Against Pro-Lifer for Protesting Abortion are Thrown Out •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Heartfelt Media Group is calling on singers of all backgrounds to record themselves as part of a virtual community chorus for an upcoming song release affirming the sanctity of life. For more details or to receive a demo, visit https://rescue.heartfeltmg.com “
POLITICAL EARTHQUAKE: Tulsi GOES OFF on Barack Obama – Says Obama Criminally Implicated (VIDEO)
By Jordan Conradson – The Gateway Pundit – July 23, 2025
ODNI Tulsi Gabbard made a surprise appearance in the White House press briefing room after she released the second batch of previously undisclosed documents on Wednesday morning that include more proof that Barack Obama directly gave the order to publish Russia Collusion hoax knowing there was no proof to back it up. Wednesday’s document release followed Friday’s document dump by ODNI Tulsi Gabbard of a declassified December 2016 presidential briefing revealing Barack Obama knew the Trump-Russia collusion narrative was a hoax Tulsi went off on Barack Obama for covering up the blackmail Putin had on Hillary Clinton… READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, Elon Musk, and President Trump.
•California Planned Parenthood Loses $300 Million After Defunding •Missouri AG Sues Planned Parenthood for Lying About Abortion Pills •Planned Parenthood Confirms It’s Shutting Down Texas Location •Gavin Newsom is Spending Millions to Kill More Babies in Abortions •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Planned Parenthood South Austin Health Center is seen following the U.S. Supreme Court decision striking down a Texas law imposing strict regulations on abortion doctors and facilities in Austin, Texas, U.S. June 27, 2016. REUTERS/Ilana Panich-Linsman – RTX2IIRZ
Heartfelt Media Group is calling on singers of all backgrounds to record themselves as part of a virtual community chorus for an upcoming song release affirming the sanctity of life. For more details or to receive a demo, visit https://rescue.heartfeltmg.com “
•Federal Judge Blocks New Law Defunding Planned Parenthood •Planned Parenthood Shuts Down Center in Texas •Baby Born at 22 Weeks 1 Day Proves Unborn Children are Human Beings •Evelyn Was Saved From Abortion. Her Mom Changed Her Mind •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Heartfelt Media Group is calling on singers of all backgrounds to record themselves as part of a virtual community chorus for an upcoming song release affirming the sanctity of life. For more details or to receive a demo, visit https://rescue.heartfeltmg.com “
President Barack Obama was among the U.S. leaders directing intelligence agencies to lie about Russians tipping the 2016 election to Donald Trump, reaffirm newly declassified U.S. intelligence records.
The Obama administration’s use of U.S. intelligence to back false claims about Trump and Russia sabotaged the peaceful transition of power necessary for democratic self-government. It denied the American majority the policies they voted for by consuming the first Trump administration with fabricated scandals, including a massive special counsel investigation. These also wasted hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars and damaged U.S. foreign policy, likely feeding the still-raging Russia-Ukraine war.
An unclassified memorandum to Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, a former Democrat member of Congress, was released Friday. It quotes newly declassified federal records that demonstrate U.S. intelligence agencies in 2016 believed Russia could not manipulate vote counts in favor of Trump or any other candidate.
It also reproduces formerly classified documents showing that Obama and his top intelligence officials — including Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, CIA Director John Brennan, and FBI Director James Comey — tossed aside such evidence to rush out a doctored “intelligence assessment” that falsely claimed the opposite. Under U.S. intelligence branding, that assessment relied on fabricated information funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign to falsely claim Trump was a Russian stooge.
The New York Times has run articles just in the last few months still promoting the conclusions of the doctored Jan. 6. 2017 “intelligence community assessment,” or ICA. A Rasmussen poll conducted just two weeks ago found 60 percent of Democrat voters and 45 percent of “moderates” still believe “the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government to win the 2016 election.” Fifty-seven percent of those polled agreed officials who manipulated evidence to “get Trump” should be prosecuted.
Obama Called for Packaging Smears As an Intelligence Assessment
Numerous email communications contained in a 114-page accompanying packet of declassified records also released Friday confirm that it was Obama who directed the rushed creation of an ICA outside normal protocols that lied to Americans about Russian interference in U.S. elections and smeared Trump as a treasonous colluder with Russia.
A Dec. 7, 2016 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) email to CIA, DHS, and ODNI recipients wrote of “discuss[ing] a NIC [intelligence community] product in response to POTUS” that “would mirror” an intelligence assessment produced in September. The September assessment said Russians couldn’t change U.S. vote totals. Later emails agreed the CIA, then led by Brennan, would lead the construction of this Obama-requested ICA.
A Dec. 9, 2016, email from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) tells 13 other ODNI and one CIA recipient, “The IC [intelligence community] is prepared to produce an assessment per the President’s request, that pulls together the information we have on the tools Moscow used and the actions it took to influence the 2016 election.”
The email set a date target for delivering the assessment to Obama on Jan. 9, 2017. That date was later moved up to Jan. 6, 2017, with top security state officials working through the holidays to release the intelligence-branded packet of smear tinder before Obama left office.
A Dec. 22, 2016 ODNI email about the Democrat disinformation-riddled ICA tells other ODNI recipients, “The only real direction we got was 1) POTUS wants a comprehensive assessment, drawing from all available sources, and 2) it has to be before the end of his administration.”
Another Dec. 22, 2016, email between top-level DNI officials concerns “the IC [intelligence community] report on Russian election meddling that POTUS tasked us to do.”
In addition to the disinformation ICA he directed at Congress and the public, Obama directly lied to Americans in speeches about Russian election interference. For example, on Dec. 16, 2016, Obama stated he was “concerned about … potential hacking that could hamper vote counting and affect the actual election process itself. And so in early September, when I saw President Putin in China, I felt that the most effective way to ensure that, that didn’t happen was to talk to him directly. And tell him to cut it out.”
At that time, however, Obama had to know U.S. intelligence agencies had assessed that statement to be false, because his staff had prevented the publication of an earlier intelligence assessment saying so, the newly released documents show. This also means the same people and agencies that erected a totalitarian censorship edifice under the pretext of “misinformation” and “disinformation” were in fact the top sources of widely believed misinformation and disinformation that have now affected at least three U.S. presidential elections.
U.S. Intel Said Russians Couldn’t Change Votes
The memorandum gives a timeline showing that U.S. intelligence analysts, agencies, and reports leading up to the 2016 election had repeatedly concluded Russia couldn’t hack U.S. elections or change vote totals. Clapper received an intelligence analysis in August 2016 stating, “there is no indication of a Russian threat to directly manipulate the actual vote count through cyber means.”
Instead, U.S. intelligence believed Russian activity was more propagandistic, affecting public confidence in the election but not its outcome. Numerous other high-level intelligence officials and assessments made similar conclusions — until December 2016.
From the Gabbard memorandum released Friday.
On Dec. 8, there was a sudden switch. Multiple intelligence agencies were preparing to publish an assessment stating, “Russian and criminal actors did not impact recent US election results by conducting malicious cyber activities against election infrastructure.”
Yet on Dec. 8, 2016, Comey suddenly declared the FBI would withdraw its support for that cross-agency conclusion, and the FBI would instead be “drafting a dissent,” the newly declassified documents show. That report was ultimately never published.
Instead, on Dec. 9, the White House held a national security meeting that included Clapper, National Security Advisor Susan Rice, Secretary of State John Kerry, CIA Director John Brennan, Andrew McCabe (Comey’s deputy), Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes. After the meeting, Clapper’s assistant sent an email to ODNI leaders with the subject line, “POTUS Tasking on Russia Election Meddling.” In the email, the assistant asks them to create an “assessment per the President’s request,” with input from the CIA, FBI, National Security Agency, and Department of Homeland Security. This meant sidelining several intelligence agencies that normally contribute to such publications.
Hollering Collusion Lies Into a Media Echo Chamber
“That same day,” Dec. 9, 2016, “Deep State officials in the IC begin leaking blatantly false intelligence to the Washington Post,” says the Gabbard memo released Friday, “… claiming that Russia used ‘cyber means’ to influence ‘the outcome of the election.’” The leaks seeded the false “Russia, Russia, Russia” narrative throughout willing corporate media partners in advance of the publication of the disinformation ICA on Jan. 6, 2017.
The doctored ICA itself crystalized and legitimized myriad politicized false claims that went on to hamstring the first Trump presidency. For example, it smeared rising pro-democracy movements across the West of citizens against international oligarchs as authoritarian by linking them with Vladimir Putin, claiming “Russian media hailed President-elect Trump’s victory as a vindication of Putin’s advocacy of global populist movements.”
Rhodes, a top Obama foreign policy advisor, was in on the Dec. 9, 2016 meeting that appears to have planned the ICA switcheroo. Rhodes is infamous for telling The New York Times in 2016 that the Obama administration “created an echo chamber” in corporate media to sell Obama’s payout of American tax dollars to Iran and government takeover of formerly private health markets: “We created an echo chamber. They [corporate media reporters] were saying things that validated what we had given them to say.”
“The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns,” Rhodes explained. “They literally know nothing.”
The documents released Friday further substantiate previous reporting by The Federalist going back to 2017 that: Obama was likely directly involved with his administration’s spying on the Trump campaign; the Obama administration spied on domestic political opponents; an email from Susan Rice implicated Obama in the Russia collusion smear against Trump; Obama intelligence officials likely lied to Congress; and that Obama himself was involved in ensnaring Trump’s first national security advisor in yet another fabricated scandal using spying, leaking, and manipulation of U.S. intelligence.
Steele Dossier Key to Potential Perjury, Conspiracy Prosecution
On Jan. 6, 2017, two weeks before Trump took office, the Obama administration published the doctored ICA. The Friday memo says that ICA falsely claimed “Putin directed an effort to help President Trump defeat Hillary Clinton,” launching years of smears and investigations.
That falsified ICA at least partly relied on the infamous Steele dossier, according to a memorandum released two weeks ago by current CIA Director John Ratcliffe. That “dossier” was an opposition research packet fabricated by British spook Christopher Steele for the Clinton campaign that has been roundly debunked since, including by a special counsel investigation.
In May 2023 (and at several other times), Brennan testified to Congress that the CIA opposed using the Steele dossier in the 2017 Russia collusion ICA he was heavily involved in creating. Yet a CIA internal review released earlier this month says Brennan included the Steele dossier in the ICA “over the objections of career intelligence officials.”The Federalist also reported that still-classified congressional reports show ICA-related Obama administration corruption is much deeper than what is currently publicly known.
FBI Director Kash Patel opened criminal investigations into Brennan and Comey earlier this month and is considering not just perjury but also conspiracy charges, according to Matt Taibbi at Racket News.
Joy Pullmann is executive editor of The Federalist. Her latest book with Regnery is “False Flag: Why Queer Politics Mean the End of America.” A happy wife and the mother of six children, her ebooks include the NEW “300 Classic Books for Ages 9 to Adult,” the bestselling “Classic Books For Young Children,” and “101 Strategies For Living Well Amid Inflation.” An 18-year education and politics reporter, Joy has testified before nearly two dozen legislatures on education policy and appeared on major media including Tucker Carlson, CNN, Fox News, OANN, NewsMax, Ben Shapiro, and Dennis Prager. Joy is a grateful graduate of the Hillsdale College honors and journalism programs who identifies as native American and gender natural. Joy is also the cofounder of a high-performing Christian classical school and the author and coauthor of classical curricula. Her traditionally published books also include “The Education Invasion: How Common Core Fights Parents for Control of American Kids,” from Encounter Books.
Pope Leo XIV arrived in the papal summer retreat of Castel Gandolfo on Sunday, July 6 to start a six-week vacation, giving the hilltop town back its most illustrious resident after Pope Francis stayed away during his 12-year pontificate.
It has been widely reported that Pope Leo will be using part of his vacation to begin drafting his first encyclical. These are important teaching documents for the Roman Catholic Church and sometimes they teach that the current pontiff can be very right, very wrong, very smart or simply not very good at this particular part of his duties. Most Catholics have high hopes for this first missive. Still, who doesn’t need editors to help with my suggestions?
The new pope has been very measured, calm and careful in the months since his election on May 8. It has to be the most dizzying of ascents and upon arrival as head of the Vatican, a confrontation with the broadest range of problems for any religious leader, and most political ones, on the planet. So Pope Leo taking things slowly and cautiously is a relief.
An encyclical is a big deal for practicing Catholics who assume encyclicals are intended to be read, studied, and the occasion of a prayer for discernment. The audience is assumed to be primarily Catholics everywhere, but Pope Leo has to be aware that the secular press —from supportive to hostile— will also be looking the first one over very carefully.
Here are some suggestions from an American Catholic his age which means we share a lot of culture, from network television, movies and music to the transition that followed Vatican II. (If Leo had to learn the Mass in Latin in order to be an altar boy only to have that chore tossed out as soon as it was accomplished and replaced with the English script, he will have perfect pitch for millions of Catholic seniors —young and old seniors alike.)
When he does begin to do interviews, if he chooses long form sit-downs with respectful journalists, the pope will go a long way to making the promise of his papacy real. Those interviews should focus on the encyclical if one issues before he does his sit-downs with reporters at least a few of whom, American Catholics hope, will be American. Curiosity about a new pope is always acute. It is off the charts about the first American pope.
So will curiosity be about the encyclical, which is a reason to hope that it is (1) written in clear, concise English and then translated by the Vatican’s best Latin scholars into the official language of the Church and (2) relatively short.
If the pope writes in English, not only will he be using his native tongue and thus be as certain as he can be that he’s conveying his meaning, it will be a huge hit with the English-speaking peoples of the world, especially the Americans, especially Midwesterners, and most especially Chicagoland Catholics. Some inside baseball phrases for Americans would be a nice touch.
The more concise the encyclical, the less susceptible it is to misleading excerpts and agenda-driven reporting. Even with the reach of the internet, hundreds of millions of people who have not read it will be told by others what it says and what it means.
As with discussions of Supreme Court decisions, the second-hand reports are usually at best incomplete and at worst intentionally misleading. In this new age of AI-driven deep fakes, don’t be surprised if subtlety-altered encyclicals instantly appear. The Vatican press office might want to assure that the real deal has arrows pointing to it. Simultaneous distribution to many of the world’s major outlets would be another guardrail.
So in English and relatively concise. I hope as well that it is not overtly political in the sense of the left-right spectrum that dominates most of the West where Leo’s letter will not be subject to suppression. If he encourages religious liberty, great! If he speaks to the need to care for life from conception to natural death, great! If he wants to encourage the flock to read and reflect on the Beatitudes, great!
If he wants to encourage Catholics to renew their commitment to the confessional, bravo! (The decline in the practice of this Catholic sacrament is pronounced, but its revival would have to begin with the direction to bishops and priests to make it a priority above all but the other Sacraments.
Pope Leo XIV could even begin with an appeal for vocations to the religious life which are needed everywhere, but especially in his homeland.
But pray he has already decided he’s not going to do immigration and especially that he’s not going to disparage capitalism or America as his predecessor was fond of intimating.
Catholics believe the Church is divinely ordained and can never fail. But it can and frequently does stumble. The road back from a divided and disillusioned Church in America begins with finding the good in the United States and praising it. Now that would be a welcome change from the past dozen years.
And please, nothing about President Trump. Read the room Pope Leo, please. You don’t need to single out the president. Lots of Catholic commentators like to do so. You don’t have to. At all.
Hugh Hewitt is a Fox News contributor, and host of “The Hugh Hewitt Show,” heard weekdays from 3 pm to 6 pm ET on the Salem Radio Network, and simulcast on Salem News Channel. Hugh drives America home on the East Coast and to lunch on the West Coast on over 400 affiliates nationwide, and on all the streaming platforms where SNC can be seen. He is a frequent guest on the Fox News Channel’s news roundtable hosted by Bret Baier weekdays at 6pm ET. A son of Ohio and a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Michigan Law School, Hewitt has been a Professor of Law at Chapman University’s Fowler School of Law since 1996 where he teaches Constitutional Law. Hewitt launched his eponymous radio show from Los Angeles in 1990. Hewitt has frequently appeared on every major national news television network, hosted television shows for PBS and MSNBC, written for every major American paper, has authored a dozen books and moderated a score of Republican candidate debates, most recently the November 2023 Republican presidential debate in Miami and four Republican presidential debates in the 2015-16 cycle. Hewitt focuses his radio show and his column on the Constitution, national security, American politics and the Cleveland Browns and Guardians. Hewitt has interviewed tens of thousands of guests from Democrats Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to Republican Presidents George W. Bush and Donald Trump over his 40 years in broadcast, and this column previews the lead story that will drive his radio/ TV show today.
The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) headquarters in Paris. (Gao Chenxiang/VCG via Getty Images)
President Donald Trump is pulling the U.S. out of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization in a move Rep. Randy Fine says he fully supports.
“This is an organization that has repeatedly pushed anti-Israel propaganda, from recognizing Palestinian statehood to denying the Jewish connection to holy sites,” Fine, R-Fla., who is Jewish, told The Daily Signal.
“It has allowed China to expand its influence and promoted woke DEI agendas that have no place in American foreign policy,” Fine said of UNESCO.
China and UNESCO have what UNESCO refers to as “a stable relationship that is conducive to world peace and prosperity.” In 2022, China became the largest financial backer of UNESCO, according to the Global Policy Journal.
“‘America First’ means we do not fund global institutions that undermine our values, rewrite history, or threaten the security of our allies,”according to Fine.
UNESCO is a United Nations organization established to promote education, science, culture, and communication in the name of furthering peace worldwide.
The Trump administration’s decision to leave UNESCO follows a 90-day review of the organization. The review uncovered, according to The New York Post, that UNESCO engages in diversity, equity, and inclusion practices and has a pro-China and pro-Palestinian bias.
“UNESCO works to advance divisive social and cultural causes and maintains an outsize focus on the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, a globalist, ideological agenda for international development at odds with our ‘America First’ foreign policy,” Tammy Bruce, a State Department spokeswoman, said in a statement Tuesday.
Bruce called “UNESCO’s decision to admit the ‘state of Palestine’ as a member state” of the organization “highly problematic” and “contrary to U.S. policy,” adding the action “contributed to the proliferation of anti-Israel rhetoric within the organization.”
Moving forward, “U.S. participation in international organizations will focus on advancing American interests with clarity and conviction,” she said.
Audrey Azoulay, director general of UNESCO, said Tuesday that the U.S. withdrawal from UNESCO “contradicts the fundamental principles of multilateralism, and may affect first and foremost our many partners in the United States of America.” But Azoulay added that the group “has prepared” for the U.S. leaving the organization, since the move was anticipated.
The U.S. will officially withdraw from UNESCO at the end of 2026, but this won’t be the first time the U.S. has pulled out of the organization. President Ronald Reagan withdrew the U.S. from UNESCO in 1984 due to concerns over corruption within the organization. The U.S. rejoined under George W. Bush’s administration in 2003. America again pulled out of UNESCO during Trump’s first administration, but rejoined under President Joe Biden’s administration.
With this now being the third time the U.S. has pulled out of UNESCO, Eugene Kontorovich, a Heritage Foundation senior research fellow specializing in international law and issues related to Israel, says U.S. leaders need to “figure out a way to make this permanent.”
“Congress should repeal, formally, its 1946 authorization for U.S. membership [in UNESCO],” Kontorovich said, “so that a future Democratic president can’t just merry-go-round us back in.”
The Left’s Safe Space: Where Consequences Go to Die
Let’s start with a universal truth: Leftism is the only ideology where you can openly fantasize about punching Nazis (read: anyone right of Karl Marx) while simultaneously clutching your pearls if someone dares to disagree with you. Ah Leftism: the magical realm where hypocrisy isn’t just tolerated—it’s celebrated.
Take my recent conversation with a conservative friend who, like many, has adopted the “live and let live” approach to his Leftist acquaintances. His reasoning? “She’s not that bad.”
Really? The classic conservative cop-out.
She only wants to dismantle the nuclear family, not the entire Western legal system. She only supports Antifa when they’re firebombing federal buildings, not when they’re (allegedly) firebombing your federal building.
This is the modern Democrat Party in a nutshell: a coalition of useful idiots who’ve convinced themselves that their side is merely “passionate” while the other side is “violent extremists.” But let’s be real—when was the last time you saw a conservative hunt down a Leftist in the streets? Meanwhile, Antifa’s resume includes shooting at ICE officers and ambushing cops. But sure, both sides.
The Myth of the ‘Reasonable’ Leftist
My friend’s argument hinges on the idea that his Leftist pal isn’t “one of the bad ones.” She just posts memes about conservatives being fascists—harmless stuff, really. But here’s the rub: silence is complicity. If she’s not actively condemning the worst of her side (spoiler: she’s not), then she’s enabling it.
Brigitte Macron: A Case Study in Leftist Absurdity
Speaking of delusion, let’s talk about France’s First Lady, Brigitte Macron. Two women were acquitted after being sued for claiming Brigitte was born male. Now, one of them is turning the tables and suing her for fraud. The rumor? Brigitte is actually Macron’s father, who transitioned. Now, I don’t care if Macron married a sentient baguette—just own it. But Leftists can’t handle the truth. They’d rather litigate it into oblivion.
Astroturfing 101: How the Left Manufactures ‘Grassroots’ Outrage
Then there’s Zohran Mamdani, the New York socialist who—shockingly—isn’t actually supported by New Yorkers.
*“Once more, with feeling (and for about the 1000th time): There are NO grassroots movements on the Left. It’s ALL top-down, astroturf funding and organizing. BREAKING: Campaign finance records reveal 72% of Zohran Mamdani’s campaign cash came from out-of-state donors — not local supporters. His donors? Hollywood elites and tech billionaires.”*
Even John Fetterman—a man who dresses like he’s perpetually mid-Napoleon Dynamite cosplay—called Mamdani out for not being a “real Democrat.” The Left is so fractured they’re eating their own. And this is before the 2024 election cycle, where we’ll undoubtedly uncover a decade’s worth of Leftist election “irregularities.”
The Conservative Conundrum: Why We Lose by Playing Nice
Here’s the kicker: Leftists post their insanity because they can. There are no consequences. Meanwhile, conservatives self-censor because we actually have jobs to lose. The asymmetry is the point.
So, the next time a Leftist friend posts some inane drivel about “fascist Republicans,” ask them: Are you cool with Antifa’s violence? The persecution of the unvaxxed? The fact that your ‘movement’ is bankrolled by coastal elites? Watch them squirm.
Because at the end of the day, the only thing worse than Leftist idiocy is conservative silence in the face of it.
Final Thought: The Left isn’t just wrong—they’re dangerously stupid. And until conservatives start treating them like the existential threat they are, we’ll keep losing. So speak up. Or get ready to live in their delusional world.
Consider this story: An outgoing president and his top officials are told that there is no evidence of Russian collusion or influence in the national election. The White House then moved to suppress the intelligence assessment and reverse the conclusions, while false claims were leaked to the press.
That is not just a major but a Pulitzer-level story, right?
Apparently not. The legacy media has largely ignored the declassified evidence and possible criminal referral on the Obama administration seeding the Russian collusion narrative just before the first Trump Administration. It supports allegations in the real Russian conspiracy: the conspiracy to create a false Russian collusion scandal to undermine the election and administration of Donald Trump in 2016.
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard suggested last week that intelligence was “manufactured and politicized” despite countervailing conclusions from American intelligence that there was no collusion or influence on the election. Critics have noted that CBS only covered the story to refute it.
The release of this information is historically significant, as it finally allows the public to see how this effort began with the Clinton campaign and was then actively cultivated by Obama officials. We previously learned that the Clinton campaign spent millions to create the infamous Steele dossier and then hid their role from the public.
Attorney Marc Elias, the general counsel to the Clinton presidential campaign, pushed the false Alfa Bank conspiracy. (His fellow Perkins Coie partner, Michael Sussmann, was indicted but acquitted in a criminal trial.) During the campaign, reporters asked about the possible connection to the campaign, but Clinton campaign officials denied any involvement in the Steele Dossier. When journalists discovered after the election that the Clinton campaign hid payments for the Steele dossier as “legal fees” among the $5.6 million paid to Perkins Coie, they met with nothing but shrugs from the Clinton staff.
Elias was back when John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman, was questioned by Congress on the Steele dossier and denied categorically any contractual agreement with Fusion GPS. Sitting beside him was Elias, who reportedly said nothing to correct the misleading information given to Congress.
Not only did Clinton reportedly spent over $10 million on the report, but Obama was briefed that she was going to create a Russian collusion narrative as part of her campaign. Aware of that Clinton effort, these new documents suggest that Obama and his aides actively sought to affirm the allegations just before Trump’s inauguration. The FBI then ramped up its own efforts despite also being told that the Steele dossier was unreliable and contradicted.
I disagree with the use of the charge of treason being thrown around with this release. Based on this evidence, it would be hard to make a criminal case against Obama, let alone the specific charge of treason. However, there are good-faith allegations raised about prior congressional testimony of key players in the Obama Administration. There may be viable criminal allegations ranging from perjury to obstruction to making false statements to federal investigators.
It is too early to gauge the basis for possible criminal charges. However, the release of this new evidence is both historically and legally significant. There is now a legitimate concern over a conspiracy to create this false narrative to undermine the incoming Administration. It proved successful in derailing the first Trump Administration. By the time the allegations were debunked, much of the first term had been exhausted. That is worthy of investigation and the public has a right to expect transparency on these long-withheld documents.
The silence of the legacy media is hardly surprising, given the key role the media played in spreading these false claims. Most media outlets find themselves in an uncomfortable position, having fostered an alleged conspiracy for years. Most reporters are not keen on making a case against themselves in spreading of these false claims.
•Doctors Remove Pregnant Mom’s Uterus and Baby to Treat Her Cancer •Mom Gives Birth to Triplets Thanks to Pro-Life Pregnancy Center •Embryoscopy: Powerful Technology Proves Unborn Babies are Human •Shocking Report Shows Women Having Multiple Abortions •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Heartfelt Media Group is calling on singers of all backgrounds to record themselves as part of a virtual community chorus for an upcoming song release affirming the sanctity of life. For more details or to receive a demo, visit https://rescue.heartfeltmg.com “
“They’re Coming Out of the Woodwork!” – DNI Tulsi Gabbard Says Disgusted Whistleblowers Who Helped Craft Obama-Brennan’s Phony Russia Report Are Turning Over Affidavits to DOJ
By Jim Hoft – The Gateway Pundit – July 20, 2025
The walls are closing in on Obama’s Deep State. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard dropped a political nuke Sunday morning on Fox News with Maria Bartiromo. Gabbard confirmed that multiple intelligence whistleblowers—some of whom helped compile the now-debunked 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA)—are “coming out of the woodwork” and preparing to hand over sworn affidavits to the Department of Justice. Maria Bartiromo: Do you believe that we will see prosecutions? Our audience wants to know where this story goes from here. Will we ever see anyone held accountable for this incredible lie on the American people? … READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, Elon Musk, and President Trump.
Christianity is at risk of being “wiped out” in parts of the world due to intensifying persecution, the United Kingdom’s special envoy for freedom of religion or belief, David Smith, has warned. The British government is now targeting 10 countries as part of its revised foreign policy focus to defend this human right.
Smith, the Labour Party MP for North Northumberland, made the remarks during a briefing at the Foreign and Commonwealth Development Office. A Christian who previously worked with Tearfund and the Bible Society, he announced a new plan to prioritize FoRB in countries where religious minorities, including Christians, Baháʼís and Ahmadiyya Muslims, face repression or violence, the Religion Media Centre reported.
Smith said the U.K. will focus on 10 countries, naming Vietnam, Algeria, India, Nigeria, Pakistan, China, Syria, Ukraine, Afghanistan and Iraq. He said these were selected because of the severity of need, the U.K.’s diplomatic ties and the possibility of making progress.
He added that persecution, carried out both by governments and social groups, can involve harassment by police, social ostracism, detention without cause, denial of citizenship, torture, attacks on places of worship and even killings, citing research by the Pew Research Center.
He cited recent data showing that 380 million Christians face persecution worldwide and warned, “Persecution on the basis of religion or belief, enacted by States themselves and social groups, is taking place on every continent in the world.”
Smith called the U.K.’s commitment “a new chapter” in foreign policy and said freedom of religion was interlinked with other liberties, including freedom of speech, conscience and assembly.
Of the 10 selected, only three — Nigeria, Pakistan and Afghanistan — are among the top 10 in the Open Doors World Watch List, which identifies countries where Christians are most severely persecuted. The worst offenders on that list, such as North Korea, Somalia and Yemen, are not among the U.K.’s current priorities.
Smith acknowledged the gap and said that countries like Eritrea and Yemen remain within his scope through ongoing advocacy. He stated that the strategy’s targeted nature does not prevent the U.K. from acting in other cases, including on behalf of prisoners of conscience.
He referred to the Ahmadiyya community in Pakistan, who are not recognized as Muslims by the state and whose mosques are often desecrated, and the repression of Baháʼís in Iran and Christians in North Korea.
FoRB, Smith explained, is not merely about religious belief but about the health of societies. “Religious intolerance and persecution can fuel instability and conflict,” he said. He added that protecting belief rights is crucial to preventing future crises, especially in countries grappling with war or sectarian divisions.
The U.K. government’s FoRB strategy involves five strands.
First, it aims to uphold international standards through bodies such as the U.N. and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. Second, it will embed the issue into targeted bilateral diplomacy, encouraging individual missions to raise FoRB in foreign capitals. Third, the U.K. will strengthen international coalitions working on religious freedom. Fourth, the Foreign Office will incorporate FoRB into its mainstream human rights programming. The fifth strand involves collaboration with civil society groups working on interfaith respect and awareness.
Speaking at the briefing, Lord Collins of Highbury, minister for human rights, said the U.K. has long believed that rights and the rule of law strengthen global prosperity and resilience. He said his office had already written to British heads of mission directing them to embed human rights, including FoRB, into all areas of diplomatic work.
He cited the recent release of two individuals — Nigerian atheist Mubarak Bala and Cuban Pastor Lorenzo Rosales Fajardo — as examples of successful British-supported advocacy.
“Only by working together can we build a world where everyone, everywhere, can live with dignity, free to believe — or not believe — without fear,” Lord Collins said.
In April, during a debate, Smith said Britain’s diplomatic stance is informed by its own history, moving “from persecution to pluralism,” which he said provides credibility to advocate abroad. He described the U.K. as “uniquely well placed” to act in support of religious liberty, citing its legacy of legal rights and peaceful pluralism.
The role of FoRB envoy was created following a 2019 report by then-Bishop of Truro Philip Mounstephen, which found that Foreign Office staff lacked awareness of global religious persecution. The report led to recommendations that religious freedom be formally integrated into U.K. foreign policy.
Smith argued that defending FoRB not only benefits persecuted communities but also those who engage in repression. He said FoRB could unlock new opportunities and freedoms for their nations to flourish, and reaffirmed his commitment to press the U.K. government to act.
Meanwhile, Christian Today noted that new research by Jersey Road PR has found that mainstream U.K. media rarely report on attacks against Christians globally.
Below is my column in the Hill on the termination of funding for National Public Radio. Now that we have ended government-sponsored media, the question is whether the media will cease acting like a state media. The good news is that the market could force a correction that the media has largely refused to make.
Here is the column:
With the final elimination of public funding for National Public Radio as part of a $9 billion savings package, the era of the American state media will technically come to an end. However, what makes for state media is not state support alone.
So, the state media is dead — long live the state media.
That variation of the traditional mourning cry of the British monarchy will be heard more in whispers than proclamations this week in Washington. The government subsidy for NPR has long been a subject of controversy. Many opposed NPR for its open bias in reporting news, a record that thrilled the left and outraged many on the right. Just before the final vote, NPR CEO Katherine Maher gave another interview that left many agape. She denied any such bias and asked whether anyone could point to a single story that showed a political or ideological slant.
Ignoring a myriad of such examples, Maher then went from defiant to delusional, insisting that NPR was trying hard to “understand those criticisms.”
It was a bit late for Maher to feign surprise or confusion, particularly as a CEO whose selection to take over the struggling NPR many of us opposed. Her glaring and overt bias did not seem like the antidote to NPR’s shrinking audience and revenue. In 2024, NPR had a window to actually “understand” the criticism and make adjustments. Instead, it treated the government subsidy as an entitlement, backed by Democratic members in Congress. The board would have done better to select a neutral journalist. Instead, it doubled down, hiring a candidate with a long record of far-left public statements against Republicans, Trump, and others.
This is the same CEO who attacked respected senior editor Uri Berliner when he tried to get NPR to address its bias and restore greater balance on the staff. Berliner noted that NPR’s Washington headquarters has 87 registered Democrats among its editors and zero Republicans.
Maher slammed the award-winning Berliner for his “affront to the individual journalists who work incredibly hard.” She called his criticism “profoundly disrespectful, hurtful, and demeaning.” Berliner resigned after noting how Maher’s “divisive views confirm the very problems at NPR” that he had been pointing out.
But I have argued that NPR’s well-established bias and publication of baseless conspiracy theories are not the real reasons for taking away its federal funding. The truth is, NPR represented an embrace of a state media model used in other countries that Americans thoroughly reject.
Maher bizarrely tried to rally support for government funding by insisting that we must “keep the government out” of the media. Congress just did precisely that by clawing back NPR’s funding.
The government has occasionally supported the media, but generally to benefit all media outlets. For example, in 1791, Madison declared that Congress had an obligation to improve the “circulation of newspapers through the entire body of the people” and sponsored the Post Office Act of 1791, giving newspapers reduced postage rates.
Notably, those same Democrats in Congress who decried the reduction of funding for NPR would have revolted over funding for more successful radio outlets, such as Fox Radio. Indeed, some of the same members had previously pushed cable carriers to consider dropping Fox News, the most popular cable news channel.
What Congress did with prior funding of a single preferred media outlet was wrong. Liberals and Democrats fought to protect the funding even though NPR’s shrinking audience is now overwhelmingly white, affluent, and liberal.
However, the end of government subsidies will not necessarily mean the end of an effective state media. As I noted in my book “The Indispensable Right,” we have seen how the media can create the same effect as state media by consent rather than coercion. For years, media outlets have echoed the same party line, including burying negative stories and repeating debunked stories. Actual readers and listeners abandoned the mainstream media in droves. “Let’s Go Brandon” became a national mantra mocking journalists for their inability even to see and hear if the sights and sounds don’t fit their preconceived narratives.
Just as Maher has expressed utter confusion on how anyone could view NPR as biased, these editors and journalists will cling to the same advocacy journalism, rejecting the principles of objectivity and neutrality. However, there is still one hope for restoring traditional journalism: the market.
Now that NPR is off the public dole, it will have to compete fairly with other radio outlets for audiences and revenue. It is free to alienate most listeners who have center-right viewpoints, but it will have to sustain itself on a smaller share of the market.
Other outlets are facing the same dire choice. Recently, the Post encouraged writers and editors to leave if they were unwilling to get on board with a new direction at the newspaper. Previously, Washington Post publisher and CEO Will Lewis had told his writers that the newspaper was experiencing massive losses in readers and revenues because “no one is reading your stuff.” It triggered a revolt on the staff, which would have rather run the paper into insolvency than return to objectivity and neutrality.
The same preference was seen with the cancellation of Stephen Colbert’s late-night show. What had been David Letterman’s formidable program had become a shrill echo chamber for the far left as Colbert engaged in nightly and mostly unfunny diatribes against Trump and Republicans. As its ratings and revenues fell, Colbert was unmoved. At the same time, Fox’s Greg Gutfeld continued to crush the competition as viewers abandoned CBS and other broadcast networks.
The year’s second-quarter ratings showed Fox News’s “Gutfeld!” drawing an average of three million viewers. Gutfeld’s more conservative takes on news remain unique among these late-night shows. In comparison, “The Late Show” with Stephen Colbert came in second last quarter with an average 2.42 million viewers, despite being a far more costly program.
As liberals expressed outrage over the cancellation and alleged that CBS’s owner, Paramount, was seeking to garner favor with the Trump Administration, even CNN admitted that the show under Colbert had become “unfortunately unprofitable.” Colbert’s show was reportedly losing $40 million a year with a bloated staff and declining audience.
Paramount issued a statement insisting that Colbert’s cancelation was “not related in any way to the show’s performance.” Perhaps, but media companies are hardly in the habit of cancelling profitable, high-performing programming.
Ultimately, the market is correcting what the media would not. Roughly half of this country is center-right, and 77 million people voted for Trump. They are turning to social media and new media rather than remain a captive audience to a biased legacy media committed to advocacy journalism.
As media outlets fail, there may also be more pressure on journalism schools to return to core principles rather than crank out social justice warriors no one wants to read or hear from.
In the meantime, Maher and NPR can continue to stay the course and try to make up in pledge drives what they lost in public subsidies. However, the whole thing will now have to pay for itself without passing along costs to the rest of the non-listening country.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Mitchell took the stand in her own defense and testified for most of the day. At times, the senator appeared nervous and emotional as she attempted to persuade the jury.
Nicole Mitchell testifies in her own defense, says she was in her stepmother’s home to check on her
By Luke Sprinkel – AlphaNews.org – July 18, 2025
The burglary trial of Sen. Nicole Mitchell, DFL-Woodbury, continued Thursday with Mitchell testifying in her own defense. In April 2024, Mitchell was arrested and charged with first-degree burglary after allegedly breaking into her stepmother’s Detroit Lakes home. Mitchell’s trial began earlier this week and has examined body-camera footage of that night and heard from multiple witnesses. On Wednesday, the prosecution rested their case against the legislator and the defense has brought multiple witnesses as they argue that Mitchell was not in the home to steal, but was instead there to check on the 75-year-old woman who was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease several years ago… READ MORE
Watch Mamdani the Commie Say That He’s OK With the ‘Abolition of Private Property’ (VIDEO)
By Mike LaChance – The Gateway Pundit – July 17, 2025
People on the left keep insisting that New York City Democrat nominee for mayor, Zohran Mamdani is not a communist, yet clip after clip of this guy talking reveals him to be an outspoken Marxist through and through.
This time, it’s a clip of him on some podcast saying that he is fine with the abolition of private property.
Note how he frames it. He wraps these comments in claims that he just cares so much about making sure that everyone has housing that he is open to doing away with private property. See? It’s just because he cares so much that he might have to take homes away from some people in order to make sure that other people have homes. It’s all about caring… READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, Elon Musk, and President Trump.
•House Passes Bill Defunding NPR and PBS •HHS Secretary: “Planned Parenthood Has No Right to Taxpayer Money” •New Law Defunding Planned Parenthood Forces Two Abortion Centers to Close •Shocking Report Shows Women Having Multiple Abortions •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Heartfelt Media Group is calling on singers of all backgrounds to record themselves as part of a virtual community chorus for an upcoming song release affirming the sanctity of life. For more details or to receive a demo, visit https://rescue.heartfeltmg.com “
•Hegseth Apologizes for Army Calling Pro-Life Americans “Terrorists” •Planned Parenthood Will Close Two Abortion Centers in Ohio •Senate Passes Bill to Defund PBS and NPR •Army Apologizes for Calling Pro-Life Organization a Terrorist Group •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Heartfelt Media Group is calling on singers of all backgrounds to record themselves as part of a virtual community chorus for an upcoming song release affirming the sanctity of life. For more details or to receive a demo, visit https://rescue.heartfeltmg.com “
On Tuesday the Justice Department petitioned for a writ of Quo Warranto against three individuals having served as board members of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting who were fired by President Trump yet allegedly continued to hold and exercise their office.
The complaint states “[s]ince April 28, 2025, Defendants Laura G. Ross, Thomas E. Rothman, and Diane Kaplan have been usurping and purporting to exercise unlawfully the office of board member of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (the “CPB”)… President Donald J. Trump lawfully removed each Defendant from office on April 28, 2025. As recent Supreme Court orders have recognized, the President cannot meaningfully exercise his executive power under Article II of the Constitution without the power to select—and, when necessary, remove—those who hold federal office. Personnel is policy, after all.”
According to Defendants, they “received an email from Trent Morse, the Deputy Director of Presidential Personnel for the Executive Office of the President, purporting to notify the board members that their positions on the Board of Directors for CPB were terminated… The Correspondence stated, in full:
‘On behalf of President Donald J. Trump, I am writing to inform you that your position on the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is terminated effective immediately. Thank you for your service.’”
Immediately after President Trump’s effort to remove the board members from their positions, the three “immediately sought a preliminary injunction against the president and other officials, seeking to enjoin the government from completing their firing. See Corp. for Pub. Broad. v. Trump, Civ. A. No. 25-1305 (RDM) (D.D.C. Apr. 29, 2025). Their effort was unsuccessful as the court held that their claim the president lacked authority to remove them from office was unlikely to succeed.’
“The Justice Department’s complaint accused the three defendants of continuing to usurp the office of Board Member of the CPB by “participating in board meetings, voting on resolutions and other business that comes before the board, and presenting themselves to the public as board members. All of this [was] manifestly unlawful.”
The board members’ original complaint, argued that the CPB was created by Congress to be “a private corporation [to] be created to facilitate the development of public telecommunications and to afford maximum protection from extraneous interference and control.” They specifically argued the following:
CPB is not a federal agency subject to the President’s authority, but rather a private corporation. See Id. at § 396(b) (“[CPB] will not be an agency or establishment of the United States Government. The Corporation shall be subject to the provisions of this section, and, to the extent consistent with this section, to the District of Columbia Nonprofit Corporation Act.”);
CPB’s Board members are not officers of the United States, and thus are not within the removal provisions of Article II of the Constitution. See Id. at § 396(d)(2) (“The members of the [CPB] Board shall not, by reason of such membership, be deemed to be officers or employees of the United States.”);
CPB Board members cannot be affected, controlled, or disturbed by the actions of the government. See Id. at § 398(c) (forbidding “any department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over educational television or radio broadcasting, or over [CPB] …”);
CPB Board members forfeit their membership in only one scenario, not present here. See Id. at § 396(e)(7) (“Members of the Board shall attend not less than 50 percent of all duly convened meetings of the Board in any calendar year. A member who fails to meet the requirement … shall forfeit membership.”);
The Act omits the typical statutory provision when creating a federal agency that the Board members serve at the pleasure of the President.
The board members sought in their complaint declaratory relief, and alleging “Violation of the Administrative Procedure Act Not in Accordance with Law/In Excess of Statutory Authority, Violation of Separation of Powers/Ultra Vires Presidential Action, Violation of the Presentment, Appropriations, and Take Care Clauses.” They also sought relief in having the court declare the e-mail terminating their position to have no legal effect and a temporary restraining order “prohibiting the Defendants from taking any action which gives effect to the Correspondence or otherwise seeks to interfere with or control the governance and operations of CPB” along with legal fees and any other relief the court might grant.
In its quo warranto filing, the Justice Department countered, “Although the Public Broadcasting Act provides that “[t]he members of the Board shall not, by reason of such membership, be deemed to be officers or employees of the United States,” 47 U.S.C. § 396(d)(2), and that the CPB “will not be an agency or establishment of the United States Government,” id. § 396(b), the Act and other statutes provide many levers of government control and influence over the CPB:
[in partial list for brevity]
As noted above, all CPB board members are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Id. § 396(c)(1).
Congress set forth specific qualifications for board members, including that no more than 5 members will be of the same political party, that board members must be “eminent in” relevant fields, and that the Board contain members who represent licensees and permittees of public television stations and public radio stations. Id. § 396(c)(1)-(3).
Congress restricted the compensation of CPB officers and employees based on a federal employee pay scale. Id. § 396(e)(1).
Congress authorized the CPB to take various actions “[i]n order to achieve the objectives and to carry out the purposes of” the Act. Id. § 396(g); see also id. § 396(a) (listing those objectives and purposes). The CPB funds “public telecommunications . . . programs,” assists “in the development . . . of interconnection systems” and “public telecommunication entities.” 47 U.S.C. § 396(g)(1). And the CPB is empowered to make grants, hire staff, make payments, and to “take any other actions” necessary to support its congressional purposes. Id. § 396(g)(2). Congress also “prohibited” the CPB from owning or operating broadcast stations or producing its own programming. Id. § 396(g)(3). The CPB is primarily funded through annual Congressional appropriations. Id. § 396(k)(1). For example, in 2024, Congress appropriated $535 million to the CPB for fiscal year 2026. See Further Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2024, Pub. L. No. 118-47, 138 Stat. 460, 696, § 407.
[…]
Congress imposed various requirements on recipients of grants from the CPB, including that they hold open meetings, that public broadcast station grant recipients establish a community advisory board, and that employees of the Public Broadcasting System and National Public Radio cannot “be compensated in excess of reasonable compensation” while those organizations receive grants. Id. § 396(k)(4), (8), (9).
[…]
The CPB is a “designated Federal entity” under the Inspector General Act, 5 U.S.C. § 415(a)(1)(A), which means it has an Inspector General who conducts investigations and audits of CPB operations and issues reports to Congress, the CPB Board and management, and the public, see Office of the Inspector General, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, https://perma.cc/AAD4-G5DL (the CPB’s Office of the Inspector General “conduct[s] independent audits, evaluations, and investigations” and “report[s] to Congress and the public about our activities”).
Congress holds oversight hearings regarding the CPB. See, e.g., House Committee on Energy & Commerce, Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Hearing: “Examining Accusations of Ideological Bias at NPR, a Taxpayer Funded News Entity,” https://perma.cc/W284-W8GW (May 8, 2024).
Specific allegations against the board members, state the three held board meetings on May 2nd, 13th and June 10th and 11th where they voted in their official capacity, adopted resolutions, and acted as if the preliminary injunction they sought had been held in their favor. Also, the President under his Article II powers has:
“[a]mple authority, both longstanding and recent, [to] establish that the power to appoint someone to a position presumptively carries with it the incident power of removal, absent a clear restriction on that removal authority. “ citing also Lebron v. National Railroad Passenger Corp., 513 U.S. 374 (1995). The Supreme Court held that the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (commonly known as Amtrak) was “an agency or instrumentality of the United States for the purpose of individual rights guaranteed against the Government by the Constitution,” even though the federal statute creating Amtrak structured it as a corporation and provided that Amtrak would not be a government agency. The Supreme Court held “that where, as here, the Government creates a corporation by special law, for the furtherance of governmental objectives, and retains for itself permanent authority to appoint a majority of the directors of that corporation, the corporation is part of the Government for purposes of the First Amendment. Lebron involved a First Amendment claim, but the Supreme Court later applied similar analysis to hold that Amtrak is also “a governmental entity for purposes of the Constitution’s separation of powers provisions.” Dep’t of Transp. v. Ass’n of Am. R.Rs., 575 U.S.43, 53-54 (2015).”
The government requested the court “enter judgment that Defendants “be ousted and excluded” from the office of board member of the CPB. The Court should also grant appropriate ancillary relief, including return of any salary or payment Defendants have unlawfully taken by virtue of their usurpation of office” and that any official actions taken by the Defendants since their termination be nullified
Judge Randolph Moss of the US District Court for the District of Columbia, who presides over both the Board Member’s and the Justice Department’s complaints found it “difficult to fathom that Congress intended to provide the members of the Corporation’s Board with essentially irrevocable tenure.”
By Darren Smith
The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility. – JonathanTurley.org
U.S. President Donald Trump and Pastor Paula White-Cain, the head of the White House Faith Office, bow their heads in prayer during a White House Faith Office luncheon in the State Dining Room at the White House on July 14, 2025 in Washington, DC. White-Cain hosted the luncheon with members of government and faith-based and community organizations. | Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images
President Donald Trump and the White House Faith Office hosted the inaugural Summit of Faith and Business Leaders on Monday to celebrate what he calls “core values that built this country,” which include “freedom, hard work, risk-taking, and above all, trust in Almighty God.”
Held in the State Dining Room, the event was attended by dozens of CEOs and business leaders, honoring those who have donated to faith-based charities.
In addition to remarks from Trump, Paula White-Cain, senior advisor to the White House Faith Office and a Charismatic televangelist, also addressed the gathering.
While Trump touched upon multiple topics during the discussion, encompassing both foreign and domestic policy, the importance of the Christian faith loomed large.
Here are four highlights from the meeting.
1. Trump highlights faith of notable entrepreneurs
U.S. President Donald Trump attends inauguration ceremonies in the Rotunda of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 20, 2025, in Washington, D.C. Donald Trump takes office for his second term as the 47th president of the United States. | Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
The president began his remarks by naming notable entrepreneurs throughout American history who strongly embraced the Christian faith. He repeatedly asserted that Christianity has had a positive influence on American society.
“From the earliest days of our republic, the steady compass of faith has guided the strong hands of American workers, builders and entrepreneurs like really no other,” he said. “Our country was founded by pilgrims and believers. And every generation since, Americans of faith have built our communities and forged new industries and enriched our country by millions and millions of people and ways.”
Trump listed John D. Rockefeller of Standard Oil, clothing entrepreneur J.C. Penney, inventor Charles Goodyear, and Chick-fil-A founder Truett Cathy as examples of business leaders “inspired by their love of God.” He insisted that there were people he could name in the room whose “names are every bit as big as that,” adding that “the proud tradition continues with all of you.”
“This group reminds us [that] a nation that prays is a nation that prospers,” he added. “I think one of the reasons we went so bad is they really wanted to take God and religion out of your lives, and there was nobody to … look up to.”
“We have to bring religion back into the country, and we’re starting to do that, I think, at a very high level.”
WASHINGTON, DC – APRIL 05: People use IRS Direct File at the Internal Revenue Service Building on April 05, 2024 in Washington, D.C. | Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images for Economic Security Project
2. Trump touts new policy allowing pastors to endorse political candidates
Much of Trump’s remarks at the event consisted of highlighting what he viewed as the major accomplishments of his administration so far.
“As president, I’ve ended the radical left war on faith, and we’re once again protecting religious freedom like never before in our country,” he said.
Trump touted “getting rid of the Johnson Amendment that didn’t let the pastors and ministers and everybody speak about politics.” He contended that in the absence of the Johnson Amendment, which was passed in 1954 to prevent nonprofits from endorsing political candidates, pastors now have the ability to say, “I don’t like that guy.”
In a legal filing last week, the IRS confirmed that religious leaders who endorse political candidates from the pulpit or through their church communications will not lose their tax-exempt status, drawing praise from conservative and progressive Christian leaders and criticism from secular legal groups.
The president recalled how many religious leaders supported him in his first presidential bid in 2016. But he claims they declined to endorse him because of concerns of losing their tax-exempt status under the Johnson Amendment. He described how, during “a meeting with 50 faith leaders” in 2015, then-candidate Trump informed them that “I’d love to have your endorsement.”
Trump expressed concern that the religious leaders “didn’t say anything” due to their concerns about the Johnson Amendment, maintaining that he was unaware of the longstanding provision because he was new to politics.
In a subsequent meeting with religious leaders ahead of the 2016 presidential election, Trump vowed to get rid of the Johnson Amendment. In 2017, Trump instructed the IRS to relax enforcement of the Johnson Amendment on churches.
Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump is rushed offstage after an assassination attempt on his life during a rally on July 13, 2024, in Butler, Pennsylvania. Butler County district attorney Richard Goldinger said the shooter is dead after injuring former U.S. President Donald Trump, killing one audience member and injuring another in the shooting. | Anna Moneymaker/Getty Image
3. Trump says his life was ‘saved by God to make America great again’
As Trump continued to talk about what has transpired during his administration, he noted that the White House gathering took place one day after the first anniversary of the Butler, Pennsylvania, campaign rally, where an assassin’s bullet nearly ended his life.
“It’s remarkable to think that it was only one year ago this week that my time on earth nearly ended,” Trump asserted. “And if you look at that, God was with me because that’s something,” he added. “In theory, I should not be with you today.”
After the attendees erupted into applause, Trump insisted that “my life was saved by God to really make America great again.” The president echoed what he has articulated in previous remarks about his assassination attempt, noting how his sons, who are avid shooters, informed him that “at that distance with that gun, you didn’t have a chance.”
“Some people say it was lucky, and some people say something else. I say something else. I think God helped us,” he concluded.
Paula White-Cain, senior advisor of the White House Faith Office, delivers remarks at a White House Faith Office luncheon, July 14, 2025. | Screenshot: Paula White Ministries
4. Paula White calls America’s business leaders ‘stewards on divine assignment’
The Rev. Paula White-Cain, a Florida-based pastor who has served as Trump’s spiritual advisor, called Trump “the greatest champion of faith of any president that the United States of America has ever had.”
She told the attendees that the Trump administration “understands that people who are of faith who are entrusted with wealth and influence, as you are, are essential to building a stronger, freer, and more compassionate nation.”
“You’re more than just CEOs and business leaders and entrepreneurs,” she said. “You’re stewards on divine assignment, builders of legacy and vessels of impact. You’ve been called by God to His kingdom for such a time as this.”
White-Cain claimed that “America’s spiritual and moral foundations have been restored.”
“And it’s only the beginning,” she continued. “Today’s not just a luncheon. It is a moment of divine alignment, a commissioning. And we believe that God is raising up business leaders who don’t separate faith from enterprise but who see their platforms and their pulpits as their businesses and instruments for eternal impact.”
In a powerful and emotional ceremony in the White House East Room, President Donald Trump signed the HALT Fentanyl Act into law, permanently classifying fentanyl-related substances as Schedule I drugs under the Controlled Substances Act. Surrounded by nearly 200 Americans who have lost loved ones to the fentanyl epidemic, President Trump delivered a resounding message of justice, strength, and relentless action against the cartels and traffickers flooding the nation with poison.
“Today, we strike a righteous blow to the drug dealers, narcotic traffickers, and criminal cartels that we’ve all been hearing so much about for so many years… and we take a historic step toward justice for every family touched by the fentanyl scourge,” Trump declared to thunderous applause. His words stood in stark contrast to the inaction and neglect of the previous administration, which allowed the border crisis to spiral out of control, unleashing a wave of fentanyl deaths across America.
President Donald J. Trump officially signs the HALT Fentanyl Act into law — permanently classifying fentanyl-related substances as a Schedule I drug under the Controlled Substances Act.
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) July 16, 2025
While the liberal media continues to downplay the devastation of the fentanyl crisis—often ignoring its ties to open-border policies—President Trump has taken decisive action. Since returning to office, his administration has seized over 4,500 pounds of fentanyl, a record-breaking effort to protect American lives.“On day one of the Trump administration, we declared an all-out war on the dealers, smugglers, traffickers, and cartels,” Trump stated, reaffirming his unwavering commitment to securing the border and stopping the flow of deadly drugs.
.@POTUS: "Today, we strike a righteous blow to the drug dealers, narcotic traffickers, and criminal cartels… and we take a historic step toward justice for every family touched by the fentanyl scourge as we sign the HALT Fentanyl Act into law." pic.twitter.com/x6uENhIMRo
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) July 16, 2025
The heartbreaking stories shared by grieving parents at the signing ceremony exposed the true cost of fentanyl. Gregory Swan, who lost his son Drew, held up his child’s photo and declared, “It’s the honor of my life to be here… His passing ruined, I thought, my life.”He praised Trump’s efforts to secure the border, emphasizing the importance of educating children on the dangers of fentanyl.
.@POTUS: "Joe Biden surrendered our borders to the most evil and vicious traffickers… allowing foreign drug cartels to carve out a massive footprint on American soil… On Day One of the Trump Administration, we declared an all-out war on the dealers, smugglers… and cartels." pic.twitter.com/q8w3SFJzM5
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) July 16, 2025
Anne Fundner, whose 15-year-old son Weston died after unknowingly taking fentanyl, delivered an emotional address, thanking Trump for finally giving victims a voice. “President Trump, for four years, we felt ignored, but you’ve changed that. We appreciate that so much,”she said, as Trump proudly held up Weston’s photo for the nation to see. Fundner highlighted Trump’s aggressive measures, including sanctioning cartels, closing shipping loopholes, and mobilizing federal agencies—actions the liberal media refuses to credit.
Greg Swan, who lost his son to opioids: "Thank you, Mr. President, for stopping the border crossings — full stop, mic drop … It was amazing what you did. We were being gaslit — and you came and lit a fire to that story, and we're a lot safer for of it." pic.twitter.com/JflFTlT29K
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) July 16, 2025
Jacqueline Siegel, who lost both her daughter and sister to fentanyl, shared her devastating story, vowing to turn her pain into purpose. “It’s turned me into more of a fighter to carry on my husband’s legacy and the other family’s legacies of saving lives,” she said.
Angel Mom Anne Fundner thanks @POTUS for signing the HALT Fentanyl Act:
"It is a lifeline for families across America in keeping our families safe… thank you so much. Thank you for keeping America safe for our children. This is what we voted for." pic.twitter.com/tWSxzIdkPO
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) July 16, 2025
While the left-wing press remains fixated on divisive narratives, President Trump is delivering real results—standing with victims, crushing cartels, and ensuring no more families suffer the agony of fentanyl poisoning.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – The White House is now investigating the Biden autopen scandal for apparent reasons. Most believe that Biden wasn’t cognitively capable of knowing what was being signed or why.
BREAKING: White House Counsel Now Investigating Growing Biden Autopen Scandal – 1 Million Documents Under Review
By Cristina Laila – The Gateway Pundit – July 15, 2025
The White House is now investigating the growing Biden autopen scandal, according to Fox News. The White House Counsel’s Office is expected to review over 1 million documents. The National Archives has already handed over more than 27,000 documents to investigators. The White House Counsel’s Office is working with the Justice Department in this autopen investigation. Fox News reported: The White House is investigating former President Joe Biden’s use of the autopen, with senior administration officials telling Fox News Digital that they already are reviewing tens of thousands of documents turned over by the National Archives and… READ MORE
California Pot Farm (and Newsom Donor) Under Investigation For Child Labor Violations After 10 Illegal Alien Juveniles Found at Facility During Raid
By Cristina Laila – The Gateway Pundit – 07/17/2025
A California marijuana farm is under investigation for child labor violations after 10 illegal alien juveniles were found at the facility during an immigration raid on Thursday. Federal agents descended on two marijuana farms in Ventura County owned Glass House Farms located in Camarillo and Carpinteria in Southern California on Thursday. The co-founder of Glass House Farms, Graham Farrar, is a Gavin Newsom donor. “According to California public campaign finance records, he also donated $10,000 to California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2018, and his most recent public political donation was to California Democratic Assemblymember Gregg Hart in July 2023,” Fox News reported… READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, Elon Musk, and President Trump.
Democrat Senator Adam Schiff’s office is not answering our questions on where he is registered to vote. He is under a Fannie Mae investigation and possible Justice Dept. probe for wrongly declaring to banks he has two primary residences, which is against multiple laws. Other Democrats like Barack Obama have explicitly stated where they are registered to vote. Adam Schiff has lived for 22 years with his family at his $1.1M home in Potomac, Md. even though he represents California. He says many lawmakers have arrangements like this, but they have one primary residence in their home states where they are registered to vote. This is the first time we’ve seen a Senator declare two primary residences, which is not allowed under federal or state tax law, mortgage law, the IRS/tax code, insurance or electoral laws. Fannie Mae investigators found his Burbank, California condo that Schiff bought years after his Potomac purchase is only 691 square feet and is a one bedroom that is too small to house any family of four, “raising doubts about their true occupancy intent.” Fannie Mae investigators also found this slipperiness, that he told a bank that refinanced his Maryland mortgage that his California condo is his primary residence, but that his “Maryland property could be considered a primary residence for insurance underwriting purposes.” Meaning, to possibly lower his home insurance costs. Plus he took property tax exemptions on his Burbank condo even though he has declared his Maryland home as his primary residence. That’s not allowed under California state law. The Fannie Mae Financial Crime Investigations unit concluded that Schiff “engaged in a sustained pattern of possible occupancy misrepresentation” on his home loans between 2009 and 2020. #schiff#AdamSchiff#adamschiff
Democrat Senator Adam Schiff’s office is not answering our questions on where he is registered to vote. He is under a Fannie Mae investigation and possible Justice Dept. probe for wrongly declaring to banks he has two primary residences, which is against multiple laws. Other… pic.twitter.com/YMjEnzdjnW
— Elizabeth MacDonald (@LizMacDonaldFOX) July 16, 2025
•Aborted Babies are Being Flushed Into America’s Drinking Water •Netherlands Euthanizes 517 People Without Consent in One Year •10 Years Ago, Planned Parenthood Was Exposed Selling Aborted Baby Parts •Washington Gov Bob Ferguson Wants to Give Planned Parenthood Millions •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Heartfelt Media Group is calling on singers of all backgrounds to record themselves as part of a virtual community chorus for an upcoming song release affirming the sanctity of life. For more details or to receive a demo, visit https://rescue.heartfeltmg.com “
Comments or questions? Email news@lifenews.com. Copyright 2003-2025 LifeNews.com For info on advertising or reprinting news, email us.
LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report Wednesday, July 16, 2025
Top Stories
•Federal Court Upholds West Virginia Abortion Ban •Court Rules States Can Ban Abortion Pills, Protect Babies •Tell New York Gov Kathy Hochul to Veto Bill Legalizing Assisted Suicide •Woman Suffocated Her Newborn Baby Girl, Tossed Her in Garbage Can •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Heartfelt Media Group is calling on singers of all backgrounds to record themselves as part of a virtual community chorus for an upcoming song release affirming the sanctity of life. For more details or to receive a demo, visit https://rescue.heartfeltmg.com “
Welcome to 2025, where we are still uncovering election fraud from the 2020 and 2022 elections. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is investigating more than 100 possible noncitizens who may have voted in both the 2020 and 2022 elections, casting more than 200 ballots. In this case, most of the suspected illegal ballots were cast in Harris County. Paxton is also investigating in Guadalupe, Cameron, and Eastland counties, based on information from the Texas Secretary of State.
Add the possible 100 fraudulent voters announced this week to the 33 potential noncitizens who may have voted illegally in 2024. Paxton started investigating those 33 voters in June after the Texas secretary of state made a referral, based on information found in the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service’s (USCIS) SAVE database, showing they voted in the 2024 general election.
Some 1,200 federal agencies use SAVE to verify U.S. citizenship or determine current immigration. For example, when an applicant applies for a Social Security Number, a drivers license, or for public housing assistance, the agency will check SAVE to see if they are a citizen. Legally, noncitizens are not allowed to vote in U.S. elections.
“Illegal aliens and foreign nationals must not be allowed to influence Texas elections by casting illegal ballots with impunity. I will not allow it to continue,” Paxton said in a statement. “Thanks to President Trump’s decisive action to help states safeguard the ballot box, this investigation will help Texas hold noncitizens accountable for unlawfully voting in American elections. If you’re a noncitizen who illegally cast a ballot, you will face the full force of the law.”
No one can realistically say fraudulent, noncitizen voting doesn’t happen. There are too many examples to ignore. Sometimes it is a single incident with one voter, like the Chinese student living in Michigan who was improperly registered to vote and is charged with voting the November election. Other times, it is a group of voters, like when Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson found 15 likely noncitizens across the state voted in November’s election, but she said illegal activity is “very rare.”
So rare, that an audits of voter registration rolls in Iowa found 277 noncitizens registered to vote or actually voted in the 2024 election. In Oregon, the elections director quit after officials discovered more than 300 noncitizens had been registered to vote, and the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles processed more than 54,600 voter registrations, 2021-2024, with an unknown citizenship.
Just last month, the Senate Judiciary Committee announced it is investigating newly declassified FBI documents alleging that in 2020 the Chinese Communist Party was making thousands of fake U.S. driver’s licenses to use to validate fake mail-in ballots. The investigation is ongoing, but we can already see it is a huge scandal. And the list goes on, and on, and on. Not rare.
The remedy is so simple. Mandatory voter identification at voter registration and when voting. The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act would keep noncitizens from voting by requiring proof of citizenship when registering to vote. It passed in the House in April and still has not moved in the Senate. It should be a bipartisan issue, but Democrats have claimed that providing identification is a burden that disenfranchises voters.
It is good officials are still digging into how the 2020 election went off the rails, so we understand the weak spots. But it is past time to shore up the election process with simple fixes like the SAVE Act, so in 2030 we are not still trying to figure out what happened in 2028.
Beth Brelje is an elections correspondent for The Federalist. She is an award-winning investigative journalist with decades of media experience.
If this past week at the Supreme Court had a soundtrack, it would be the Mortal Kombat victory theme blaring over a chorus of sobbing ACLU interns.
Three major rulings dropped like anvils on progressive immigration fantasies; each one a constitutional mic drop—and each one a massive win for Donald Trump. The man the media called a dictator just used the courts—again—to prove he’s the only one playing by the rules. The Left, meanwhile, is so far out of bounds they’re tailgating in North Korea.
Let’s break it down.
1. No More Judicial Mall Cops
In Garland v. CASA, the Supreme Court ended one of the Left’s favorite tactics: the nationwide injunction. For years, low-level district judges—many looking to land a Netflix deal—blocked Trump’s entire national immigration policy with one ruling. Think about that. A part-time federal judge in Berkeley could tell the President of the United States: “Nope, I don’t like that law. You’re canceled.”
Not anymore.
SCOTUS ruled that only plaintiffs actually named in a case can be shielded by injunctions. No more rogue benchwarmers hitting pause on national security just because their barista cried about ICE raids. This is the adult equivalent of putting a baby gate on the judiciary. It doesn’t just rein in activist judges—it shoves them back into their assigned seats.
But perhaps the best part? The dissent. Oh, sweet mercy—the dissent.
Ketanji Brown Jackson delivered a 27-page emotional support pamphlet masquerading as jurisprudence. It read like someone asked ChatGPT to summarize Tumblr posts on immigration and feelings. She didn’t just miss the point—she brought a kazoo to a gunfight. Even Amy Coney Barrett, the queen of civility, gently scooted her chair away. You know it’s bad when a Justice with seven kids and zero tattoos goes full “I don’t know her.”
2. The Fourteenth Amendment Wasn’t Written in Spanish
The same case—Garland v. CASA—brushed up against one of the most sacred cows in the Democrat petting zoo: birthright citizenship. Now, the Court didn’t rule on whether babies born to illegal immigrants on U.S. soil automatically get citizenship—but they did make clear that only named plaintiffs in a lawsuit can challenge that policy. That means if you’re not part of the case, you’re not protected. And suddenly, immigration activists are racing to build legal “class actions” faster than Hunter Biden racing to find a burner phone.
Here’s what they don’t want you to understand: The 14th Amendment was written to protect the children of freed slaves—not to provide frequent flyer miles for birth tourists or human traffickers who time a border crossing with a contraction.
Imagine explaining to Frederick Douglass that his hard-won amendment is now being used to hand out U.S. passports like Costco samples. It’s grotesque. And it’s no accident.
For decades, the Left has pimped out the 14th Amendment like a punch card at a nail salon—weaponizing it to grant “citizenship by squatting” and hollowing out its original purpose. If Trump gets his way—and if this SCOTUS continues holding the line—America may finally end birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants. Not by fiat, but by law. You know, that thing we’re supposedly still doing here.
3. Third-Country Deportation—Now Boarding
You know what really broke the Left this week? The Supreme Court saying, “Yes, you can deport criminal illegal aliens… to countries other than their homeland.”
And cue the meltdown.
This was a direct hit to the Biden DOJ and their activist judges who blocked Trump’s policy on the grounds that criminals might be “uncomfortable” getting dropped off somewhere that isn’t home. Really? I’m sorry, did we start offering concierge service for cartel hitmen? Trump’s plan was simple: If you’re an illegal immigrant, and your home country won’t take you back, you’re not our problem forever. We’ll send you to a third country—anyone willing to accept you.
Naturally, Democrats freaked out. Because suddenly, the “browning of America” was turning into the lightening of Africa. I say let’s lean into it. If Leftists love diversity so much, let’s export it. Let’s send gangbangers to places that have never experienced “cultural enrichment” like MS-13 tagging up the Serengeti. We’re not deporting—we’re diversifying the globe.
Imagine a convicted felon landing in Botswana and trying to explain that his machete tattoos are “just for show.” Or an MS-13 member introduced in Rwanda as “our new visiting fellow in machete diplomacy.” You wanted globalism? Here you go. Hope your village elders are ready for street racing and fentanyl overdoses.
The cherry on top? Over a million illegal immigrants have already left the U.S.—voluntarily—in anticipation of Trump’s second coming. That’s what you call preemptive border security.
4. Trump: The Most Law-Abiding “Dictator” in History
Let’s zoom out.
The media has painted Trump as a dictator since 2015. Mussolini with better hair. But here we are, in 2025, and what’s he doing? Winning—in court.
They said he’d destroy the Constitution. Instead, he’s restoring it—using it like a battering ram against judicial activism, fake rights, and weaponized tears. They said he would tear down the system. No—he’s beating them with it.
You don’t indict a guy five times and have him keep walking out the front door with a grin unless the law is on his side. Every single win this week was a win for:
The rule of law,
Common sense,
And the millions of Americans tired of being told their country belongs to everyone except them.
This is what makes the Left scream. They can’t claim Trump’s breaking democracy when he keeps beating them in it. He doesn’t kick down doors. He walks through them—legally, surgically, and with a smirk that says, “Told ya.”
And that’s why these rulings matter. Not just for policy, but for the soul of the nation. We’re seeing the end—maybe—of the weaponization of the 14th Amendment. The end of anchor babies. The end of open-borders lunacy dressed up as compassion. We might actually return to an America for Americans—and for those who earn their place here, not for those who sneak in, break the law, then sue for hotel points.
Final Thought: From Courtroom to Comeback
Trump didn’t jail his enemies. He didn’t silence dissent. He didn’t build gulags. He went to court. And won. Clean. Constitutional. Surgical. He’s not the tyrant they warned about. He’s the comeback they never saw coming.
So light a candle for the New York Times editorial board. Send tissues to MSNBC. And tell KBJ to stop submitting feelings as footnotes. Trump’s back. And the Constitution just gave him the keys.
The expanding adoption of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is finding utility in nearly all areas of human thought and expression. Its speed, increasing sophistication and accuracy promises not only unique ideas but shows ability in automating ordinary processes which hopefully afford people savings in time and resources, enabling them to focus on the bigger picture and more important duties. There are however some worrying trends that can come up on the reliance of such technology in areas it is not yet suited. This article will focus on one area: police and criminal justice reporting.
A common complaint expressed in the law enforcement world and for that matter many other professions, is that an officer spends more time on paperwork than performing actual duties. In recent years, one solution promises a fundamental change to reduce the amount of time devoted to report writing through GenAI. The technology has developed to such a degree that industry offers law enforcement agencies the ability to use video recordings provided by body cameras or dash cameras to not only transcribe what was said by persons in the video (via voice recognition) but assemble the pertinent audio and video information into an actual police report that can be reviewed, corrected if necessary, and signed off by a commissioned law enforcement officer as his official report of the incident.
The promise made by GenAI is that officers will spend less time on overhead and can instead devote greater time to patrol and investigative duties elsewhere and thus be more efficient and less interrupted by paperwork.
To understand the problem let’s look at a brief synopsis of some milestones of police report generation over the past forty-five years.
With most agencies in the United States, the early 1980s consisted of sparse use of computer systems by line officers—they were typically database implementations for storing information of persons, vehicles, wanted or stolen records and as communications systems between agencies—rarely used by officers when completing crime reports and such. Most reports and citations were handwritten or typed and because of the amount of time used, especially in the case of handwritten forms, the amount of information conveyed was less, yet the time requirement was high. As the 1980s began to close personal computers began to be adopted by agencies for officer use and eventually the systems became more integrated and greatly more efficient. The speed of report writing not only increased, but the retrieval time and search ability was unmatched. Paper records and microfiche now became archaic.
Yet with the ease and efficiency of record keeping greatly improved, paradoxically so did the volume of information created, or required. This is certainly not unique to law enforcement as it has also been the case with patient charting with healthcare and in other fields. The efficiency invited the opportunity to create more data, and it was then expected.
Soon it became no longer necessary for a line officer to drive to a station to complete reports as in-car systems became standard practice, eventually replacing such things as paper citation forms given to violators but instead typing it in electronically, filing it automatically with the department and the courts, and printing off a copy for the violator. Nearly all the officer’s paperwork could be completed electronically and in the field.
The next advance began with what is commonly referred to as DashCams and BodyCams, electronic audio and video of law enforcement officer encounters with the world and individuals. Both have proven to be very useful in terms of correctly capturing information for which can be used by the criminal justice system. The cameras are greatly useful in correctly documenting events witnessed by the officer and in most respects are superior to not always reliable memory of those involved. In some ways they have reduced the amount of paperwork since the officer wearing the camera can simply provide a written synopsis in the written report and then reference an attached video as evidence. Or of this is not fully permitted, watching the video while composing the written report served to prompt the officer to write the report completely and accurately as depicted in the video. The GenAI service can take this to a high level of efficiency by generating most of the report in draft form whereupon the attesting officer then makes any corrections and fills in any gaps or external details. Such reports generated by AI mimic that of the conventional standard “style” of a crime report and from a workflow perspective the officer assumes a role that is in some way more of an editor rather than an author.
On a side note, when electronic videos of police cameras came to the attention of the public, the compliance requirement of freedom of information/public disclosure law went far beyond that of ordinary written reports which could relatively easily be redacted and disseminated when appropriate. Now departments must be tasked with being video editors to redact non-disclosable information such as faces, identities, words, addresses and other private information. The storage requirement for hours of video for sometimes hundreds of officers has become costly and added an additional burden.
Any new technology does have concerns that might offset some of the benefits. Some of the concerns are at what point does the AI become the primary author and the officer the rubber stamp approver. I present some open questions on the technology:
Will a low number of GenAI providers of police reports lead to a near monopoly of companies having access and control of information of most law enforcement agencies?
Will reliance on GenAI lead to an atrophy of skill in report writing in the ordinary sense by employees and if accuracy improves make them prone to overlook the occasional but highly consequential errors?
Law enforcement agencies have strict controls over dissemination of records for current or in-progress investigations and intelligence. Is GenAI use a vector by which outside actors can infiltrate police and government agencies? Those who might hack into the GenAI providers could learn of investigations or forewarn wanted persons of an upcoming arrest, or watch the agency via the AI input it submits?
Who controls the data given to the GenAI provider and is it subject to proper oversight? Will there be a temptation to sell the information to third parties?
How can bias be controlled in the GenAI response? The output is only as good as the input or the algorithm. Could the AI develop a bias as a result of incorporating the data it generates?
Are revisions and updates to each report considered work product and/or are they subject to discovery?
If the GenAI report is mostly completed by something other than the officer, how true is the officer’s testimony as to what he believed was happening since his mind did not actually create most of the report?
Is the present implementation of GenAI reports sufficiently efficient to mitigate the time required for necessary corrections and edits by the signing officer?
If the procedure is to plug the video/audio into the GenAI application, receive the generated draft, then make corrections and certify under penalty of perjury that the report is a true and accurate declaration of facts…are officers willing to risk a false swearing or perjury charge if computer generated data was inaccurate and overlooked?
Will GenAI created reports be considered expert analysis and will the output be challenged by the courts?
Are police administrators sufficiently adept and understanding of the artificial intelligence technology to fully understand managing or configuring the software?
Ethically have we fully considered what we are doing with GenAI with regard to justice? Those civilians and others who are subject to the GenAI reports have the most to lose as their lives can be changed markedly for the better or for the worse. Have we become so lazy and indifferent to them that we cannot be bothered to completely write a report ourselves?
What would become of the future of criminal justice if artificial intelligence is incorporated without restraint or consideration of the consequences? I can foresee a few areas where it promising use such as for generating a picture of an unidentified assailant from the descriptions of a witness, analyzing trace evidence, finding trends in data, and such. I do have reservations in what is made of the technology when it can be inexpensively replicated and used in place of a commissioned law enforcement officer.
An example would be incorporating AI into actually enforcing the law, where a camera films a speeding vehicle, a stop light violation, or eventually a strong armed robbery. The AI then identifies the persons involved, generates the report, and makes a charging decision with less and less human involvement. Are we to allow AI systems standing to enforce the law and are we going to question it since we have become so accustomed to its reliability and the fact that it is used everywhere? It might sound like “future shock” but we should consider how far we are willing to accept the convenience of low-cost surrogates of our responsibility.
By Darren Smith
The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.
President Trump Slams Fed Chair Jerome Powell: “We should be number one, and we’re not. And that’s because of Jerome Powell.” (Video)
By Margaret Flavin – The Gateway Pundit – July 11, 2025
The conflict between President Trump and Fed Chair Jerome Powell continues to fester. Last week, The Gateway Pundit reported that Trump called on Powell to resign, saying on Truth Social,“’Too Late,’ should resign immediately!!!” Speaking to the press outside the White House, Trump was asked if he would fire Powell. President Trump replied, “No….I think he’s doing a terrible job. I think we should be three points lower interest rate. He’s costing our country a lot of money. We should be number one, and we’re not. And that’s because of Jerome Powell….In terms of interest…” READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, Elon Musk, and President Trump.
The Department of Homeland Security on Monday ripped a media report as “fake news” that alleged illegal immigrants in overcapacity detention centers are going hungry because of food shortages. An unnamed former Immigration and Customs Enforcement official told NBC News in a story published Monday that it’s difficult for a detention facility to stay stocked with the right amount of food when it might face an unexpected surge of new detainees.
“FAKE NEWS!” DHS wrote in a post on X. “Any claim that there is a lack of food or subprime conditions at ICE detention centers are FALSE. All detainees are provided with proper meals, medical treatment, and have opportunities to communicate with their family members and lawyers.‘
“Meals are certified by dieticians. Ensuring the safety, security, and well-being of individuals in our custody is a top priority at ICE.”
Reports of poor conditions at ICE facilities are becoming a common theme in the mainstream media, with The New York Times reporting June 28 that the Trump administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration is straining the nation’s detention facilities. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act provides $45 billion for ICE detention centers and reportedly could lead to an additional 116,000 to 125,000 beds, slightly below the 131,000 U.S. citizens in federal prisons, according to U.S. Sentencing Commission data.
DHS posted, “ICE actually has higher detention quality standards than most US detention spaces that hold actual US citizens. Despite a historic number of injunctions, DHS is working rapidly, overtime to remove these illegal aliens from detentions centers to their final destination: home.”
The so-called autopen scandal appears to be getting worse for former President Joe Biden as more information comes to light.
Biden, some of his former staffers, and a handful of thought leaders in the Democratic Party have attempted to triage the message about the inner workings of the previous presidential administration. But tangible evidence is mounting that it was effectively run like a kind of politburo.
The New York Times released an interesting report Sunday afternoon that included a short interview with Biden saying he made decisions on clemency that were carried out with an autopen. In the final month of his presidency, Biden pardoned a number of high-profile people and granted clemency to an additional 1,500.
High-profile examples included his son, Hunter Biden, members of the Jan. 6 committee, former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Dr. Anthony Fauci, and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Mark Milley.
“Everybody knows how vindictive [President Donald Trump] is, so we knew that they’d do what they’re doing now,” Biden said in the Times interview. “I consciously made all those decisions.”
Biden insisted that he was “conscious” of all his administration’s decisions (a contention not helped by his rambling responses).
But snippets from the Times’ report calls that claim into question.
“Mr. Biden did not individually approve each name for the categorical pardons that applied to large numbers of people, he and aides confirmed,” the Times reported. “Rather, after extensive discussion of different possible criteria, he signed off on the standards he wanted to be used to determine which convicts would qualify for a reduction in sentence.”
On Biden’s last day in office Biden’s chief of staff Jeff Zients gave approval to use the autopen in the cases of Fauci and Milley, according to the Times.
In addition, the Times reported that Biden’s staff who drafted the blubs for acts of clemency admitted that they weren’t in the room with the president when approval for signing them was made.
NYT reporting on Biden pardons starts by repeating him saying he made the clemency decisions…but then buries his staff’s admission that he actually didn’t, and that the staffers sending those decisions to the autopen weren’t actually in the room when Biden allegedly gave his say… pic.twitter.com/woCOJyafxg
Whatever the intent of Biden or this report, it certainly didn’t clear up the suspicion that Biden wasn’t mentally competent to make decisions and that his staff and perhaps other people were essentially usurping executive power they didn’t have. When you combine that with the recent decision by Biden’s White House doctor to continually plead the Fifth Amendment to remain silent at a recent closed doors House hearing and former first lady Jill Biden’s chief-of-staff Anthony Bernal suddenly becoming uncooperative with the autopen investigation it certainly raises suspicion.
And that’s a potentially enormous scandal, even bigger than the media’s coverup of the president’s health. Not only was the country put in danger with an out-to-lunch commander in chief, but members of his staff may have been wielding unconstitutional powers on his behalf.
Trump said to reporters Monday that the autopen scandal may be one of the biggest in American history, and he may be correct.
.@POTUS: "The autopen I think is maybe one of the biggest scandals that we've had in 50-100 years. This is a tremendous scandal… I guarantee you he knew nothing about what he was signing. I guarantee it." pic.twitter.com/ozngUkINSz
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) July 14, 2025
Cruz may have come to this conclusion based on the testimony of a witness at a recent Senate hearing on the autopen use and abuse. Cruz asked Theodore Wold, a visiting fellow for law and technology policy at The Heritage Foundation, whether an executive order signed by a staffer who autopen signs it without the president’s knowledge is legally binding.
Wold answered, “No.”
‘HAIL TO THE PEN’: @SenTedCruz Torches Biden’s Use of Autopen as an ‘Assault on Democracy’
Since July 2022, the vast majority of Biden’s executive orders—including every single one in 2025—were signed by an autopen, not the president.
Unfortunately, there is very little precedent here to rely on to determine what the status of those pardons is. So, this may end up being more of a political battle than a legal dilemma.
I suspect this is why close associates of Biden are becoming closed lipped. This is about more than just Biden’s legacy or the media’s shame. It’s about whether Biden’s pardons are legally binding. It’s about whether members of the Biden White House misused their power. Did they commit fraud?
Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., who is the chairman of a Senate committee looking into the autopen use, suggested that’s a possibility.
They may have broken several federal laws: – Fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1001) – Forgery (18 U.S.C. § 471) – Misuse of Government Property (18 U.S.C. § 641) – Conspiracy to Defraud the United States (18 U.S.C. § 371) – Obstruction of Justice (18 U.S.C. § 1503 or § 1512) pic.twitter.com/D9WfO1mQNz
— Senator Eric Schmitt (@SenEricSchmitt) July 14, 2025
One way or another, the American people deserve answers.
Buckle up, folks, because we’re diving headfirst into a political circus so absurd it could double as a reality TV plot twist! Imagine a world where politicians spin tales so wild they’d make Pinocchio blush, only to have their own wallets—and voters—call their bluff. That’s the rollercoaster ride we’re on today as Democrats, long champions of open borders and free handouts, are suddenly forced to foot the bill for the very illegals they swore wouldn’t cost a dime. The hypocrisy? It’s as thick as a California fog and twice as insulting. Let’s peel back the curtain on this comedy of errors, where Gavin Newsom and J.B. Pritzker are learning the hard way that fairy tales don’t pay the bills.
Act 1: The Golden State’s Budget Blunder
Picture this: California’s Governor Gavin Newsom, dubbed by some as the “worst governor in America” (a title he wears with a suspiciously smug grin), recently pulled a budgetary bait-and-switch that would make a magician jealous. In a move that screams “progressive panic,” he’s tweaking Medi-Cal to slap a $100 monthly premium on undocumented immigrants aged 19 and up starting in 2027. The catch? His office insists, with a straight face, that “no one will be kicked off their health care.” Sure, Gavin, and I’ve got a bridge in San Francisco to sell you!
And although Newsom’s office emphasized in materials it released that “no one will be kicked off their health care,” undocumented immigrants 19-years-old and older who are already on Medi-Cal’s rolls would have to pay a $100 monthly premium beginning in 2027.
All told, the changes will save the state about $5.4 billion by 2028, according to figures released by Newsom’s office.
The proposed reversal marks a significant retreat on an issue the governor has touted as being a linchpin in his goal of providing universal health care coverage in California. His success pushing through the initiative, which began in January 2024, helped solidify Newsom’s role as a progressive force in Democratic politics. The backtracking will be a political gift to conservatives, who for months have been criticizing the program as excessively expensive and out-of-touch with what Californians want in tough economic times.
This isn’t just a budget tweak; it’s a full-on retreat from the progressive podium Newsom’s been preaching from since 2024.
The $5.4 billion savings by 2028? That’s taxpayer money he’s clawing back because, surprise, Californians aren’t thrilled about funding universal healthcare for folks who strolled across the border. Conservatives are popping champagne, and rightly so—this is the kind of ammo they’ve been dreaming of. But let’s not kid ourselves: Newsom’s not suddenly seeing the light; he’s just feeling the heat from a state economy teetering on the edge. For more on California’s fiscal tightrope, check out this analysis from the California Legislative Analyst’s Office.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Minnesota and the Minnesota (DHS) are being investigated by the U.S. DOJ for engaging in race and sex-based discrimination employment Practices.
Department of Justice launches investigation into Minnesota after Alpha News report
By Luke Sprinkel – AlphaNews.com – July 11, 2025
“States invite investigation when they engage in biased hiring practices tied to protected characteristics,” said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon. The State of Minnesota and the Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) are being investigated by the U.S. Department of Justice to determine whether the state “engaged in race- and sex-based discrimination in its state employment hiring practices.” Earlier this week, Alpha News published a report about a DHS policy which requires agency staff to justify their reasons for hiring a “non-underrepresented candidate” for a job where there is allegedly “underrepresentation.”… READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, Elon Musk, and President Trump.
“Storm the White House”: House Democrats Say Their Trump Deranged Supporters Are Urging Them to Get Shot, Get Violent, Get Arrested to Stop President Trump
By Kristinn Taylor – The Gateway Pundit – July 7, 2025
Axios reported a crazy story Monday morning about what House Democrats are saying their supporters are urging them to do to resist President Donald Trump: Get shot, get violent, get arrested, even storm the White House. With Republicans holding the White House, both houses of Congress and a 6-3 (sometimes) conservative majority on the Supreme Court, Democrats are powerless to stop much of the Trump agenda. With Trump and his administration racking up win after win in Congress, the Supreme Court, the economy, foreign policy and especially the culture, Democrats dropping the F-bomb and other swear words in everyday messaging, giving marathon speeches and holding “No Kings” protests aren’t working to satisfy the masses of Democrat voters consumed by Trump Derangement Syndrome. They want blood… READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, Elon Musk, and President Trump.
• White House Fights Planned Parenthood Lawsuit to Block Defunding • Federal Judge Blocks Planned Parenthood Defunding •Abortionist Charged With Murder After Leaving Newborn to Die •Massachusetts Planned Parenthood Will Lose $14 Million, May Close •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Heartfelt Media Group is calling on singers of all backgrounds to record themselves as part of a virtual community chorus for an upcoming song release affirming the sanctity of life. For more details or to receive a demo, visit https://rescue.heartfeltmg.com “
Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal. We’ve talked in the past a lot about the unfortunate turn to the hard Left that Democrats have made. But in the last week, it’s become surreal.
We had this minor official—a Democratic official—Sade Perkins, and she posted that she was almost happy that we lost over a hundred people, the majority of them children, in this flash flood in Texas. She said they were “all white,” and therefore, they were discriminatory. I’ve never seen anything like it.
And then, people weighed in. And they had some atrocious comments. A pediatrician was almost gloating. And they had a variety of mechanisms to show how grotesque and ghoulish they were. One group of people said, “It was global warming. You people in Texas”—where, by the way, there’s more, I think, there’s more wind turbines and solar than almost anywhere—”you people denied global warming. This was caused by global warming. And therefore, you got your just desserts.”
It was not caused by global warming. It was a once-in-a-century flash flood of a magnitude no one had seen in a hundred years.
And then there were other people who said, “You supported the Department of Government Efficiency cuts, so you got what you deserved.” And in her case, she said, “You’re white people.”
So, it’s very, very, very disturbing.
At the same time, we’ve had now two organized assassination attempts of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, who are just following the law. Remember what they’re doing. Apparently, in the mind of the Left, it was a moral thing to break the law and let 12 million people—without vaccinations, without audits, without criminal background checks—come into the United States. But it is an amoral thing to enforce the law and restore the rule of law, and ask people, who came in illegally, to please return.
But in that conundrum, we’ve had now 10 people arrested. And they were kind of Antifa types. I’m not saying they were Antifa. But they were dressed in black. They had radios. They had semi-automatic weapons. They had body armor. They were young, mostly white kids that looked like they were children of the middle class. And they shot an ICE agent in the neck. And they had a gun battle. And then, this was following an earlier assassination attempt.
Now, you think that the Democratic Party would be worried. But we’ve got even more disturbing reports that Democratic Congress people said, “Well, what are we supposed to do? We meet with our constituents and they’re telling us that one of us should be shot. I don’t mean shot by punishment. They’re urging us to use violence and be willing to be shot by others to promote a radical agenda.”
And I don’t know if that’s true because they won’t report any circumstances that would substantiate that. But basically, the congressional Democrats are saying, “I don’t know what I can do. These people are pushing us to the radical edge.”
And then you saw House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, didn’t you? He was posing with a bat like he was going to club people, in opposition to the “Big, Beautiful Bill.”
I could go on with all of these examples. But I mean, this is an age in which people tried to kill President Donald Trump twice. And we know what happened to House Majority Leader Steve Scalise and other congressional personnel. And so, we’re getting a Luigi Mangione, etc. The attacks on Jewish people in Washington, D.C. We’re getting to the point now, the Left is entering the era of sedition, insurrection.
We had Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass go to a park and confront ICE agents who were federal law enforcement people, obeying and enforcing, and trying to restore the legitimacy of federal law, which surpasses municipal and state law, remember? And she said, “You’ve got to get out of my city.”
This is insurrection. Why is it happening? We’ve said in the past that part of it is that the Democratic agenda nobody wanted, there were 80/20, 70/30 issues, and as a result of that, they lost the Congress, they lost the White House, they lost, of course, in most cases, the Supreme Court.
So, they don’t have any power. So, they’re frustrated. But I think, even more importantly, in the first administration, Donald Trump addressed symptoms of the progressive project: Let’s restore deterrence. Let’s try to deal with the border. Let’s try to stop crime. Let’s cut taxes. But he didn’t have time or the knowledge or the constituencies. And he was working with a hostile Congress to address the root causes of those symptoms.
This time he’s saying, “This lunacy, it’s caused by certain institutions: foundations, universities, the Democratic Party, public broadcasting, the media.” And so, what he’s doing is he’s going after blue-stocking, left-wing law firms. He’s going after the endowment and taxing university endowments. He’s looking at grants on federal—grant surcharges gouging the federal government on university grants. He’s dealing with countries that are openly promoting open borders.
So, he’s dealing with the symptoms. And the Left is saying, “Oh my gosh, we have no institutional power. And now the way that we exercise power without having legislative or executive influence is institutions, foundations, media, K-12, universities. And Donald Trump is starting to address our left-wing monopoly and dominance of those institutions. And if he were to be successful, we would collapse, dissipate, disintegrate. So, we’re going to go take to the streets and we’re going to use violence and we’re going to do anything possible to stop this Donald Trump counterrevolution.”
It’s going to be very dangerous times. We’ve got to be very careful about what everybody says and not escalate the situation. But it’s mostly, now, coming from a frustrated and impotent Left.
“We accept virtually all students of color.” Those words from Professor Roger Gilles, director of the Frederick Meijer Honors College, may seem a bit odd to Supreme Court justices who believe that they ended racial discrimination in admissions years ago in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, 600 U.S. 181 (2023). The college is part of Grand Valley State University in Michigan and still apparently uses race as not just one factor but an overriding factor in admissions. Gilles’s April 4, 2022, email to colleagues could prove the ultimate admission against interest. As detailed by the College Fix, he explained to the faculty that “we accept virtually all students of color, except in cases in which the student’s writing is such that we’re convinced they would struggle far too much in our first-year sequences.” He even boasted that “This year, in fact, we accepted a ‘Signature Saturday’ student with a high GPA but an SAT score of 880..!” That score would put a student below the 25th percentile. Gilles also said that race was the predominant factor in aid, stating ‘[w]ith the cooperation of Jodi in Admissions and Michelle in Financial Aid, we’ve tried hard to give most of the limited number of Honors-specific scholarships we award to students of color. This has been the case going back to Dr. J.” Dr. J is a reference to Professor Jeff Chamberlain, who was hired by the University of North Florida to perform the same function and is now an academic program manager for the University of Oregon.
The College Fix alleges that the university redacted portions of the email where the discrimination on the basis of race was discussed.
Despite Gilles appearing to defy the Supreme Court ruling in the Students for Fair Admissions case, it was clearly not enough for some. Professor Melanie Shell-Weiss wrote that “[f]rom a diversity standpoint, the needle effectively hasn’t moved.”
In 2017, Chief Justice John Roberts declared: “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”
In 2023, Roberts wrote in Students for Fair Admissions that “[universities and colleges] have concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice.”
These admissions could trigger a response from the Departments of Justice and Education under Title VI, which prohibits preferential treatment based on race or ethnicity. The government loves admissions against interest, particularly in the area of college admissions where most faculty and administrators rarely publicly acknowledge race-based selections.
The Trump administration notched another victory this week when U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta in Washington granted a motion to dismiss a case brought by five organizations to stop the cancellation of more than 360 grant awards by the Justice Department. However, in reaching this relatively straightforward conclusion, Judge Mehta opted to follow a pattern set by other judges in adding his own personal commentary on the wisdom of the policy change. Judge Mehta easily found that he lacked jurisdiction over such questions. However, he then vented his own personal views on the policy:
“Defendants’ rescinding of these awards is shameful. It is likely to harm communities and individuals vulnerable to crime and violence. But displeasure and sympathy are not enough in a court of law.”
Actually, neither the court’s displeasure nor sympathy should be part of the decision of a court of law. With all due respect to Judge Mehta, some of us find it shameful that judges are using these opinions to express their political viewpoints. I previously wrote about this pattern of extrajudicial commentary, particularly among the judges of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan, an Obama appointee who previously presided over Trump’s election interference case, was criticized for failing to recuse herself from that case after she made highly controversial statements about Trump from the bench. In a sentencing hearing of a Jan. 6 rioter in 2022, Chutkan said that the rioters “were there in fealty, in loyalty, to one man — not to the Constitution.” She added then, “[i]t’s a blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day.” That “one person” was still under investigation at the time and, when Trump was charged, Chutkan refused to let the case go.
Later, Chutkan decided to use the bench to amplify her own views of the pardons and Jan. 6. Like Judge Mehta, she conceded that she could not block the pardons but used the cases to express her personal disagreements with President Trump and his policies. She proclaimed that the pardons could not change the “tragic truth” and “cannot whitewash the blood, feces and terror that the mob left in its wake. And it cannot repair the jagged breach in America’s sacred tradition of peacefully transitioning power.”
I fail to see how being assigned this case gives a judge license to hold forth on their own views of the merits of these grants or the implications of their suspension. He is tasked with deciding the legal questions in the case, which he did so correctly.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Democrats always go back to the same well of old stale talking points like “People will die” when it comes to conservative policies that actually help all Americans.
BRANCO TOON STORE
Chuck Schumer Says if the ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ Passes WE’RE ALL GOING TO DIE (VIDEO)
By Mike LaChance – The Gateway Pundit – June 4, 2025
Democrat drama queen Chuck Schumer is warning that if the ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ passes, we’re all going to die. Why are Democrat leaders such ridiculous and unserious people? Remember when Net Neutrality was going to kill us all? How about when we were told that we only have a few years left before we all die from climate change? It’s always the same old story. This is why the Democrats are about as popular as pond scum at the moment, even with their own voters. FOX News reported: Schumer warns Trump budget bill Medicaid cuts could jeopardize GOP senators: ‘We Are All Going to Die Act’ Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., on Wednesday renamed President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” the “We’re All Going to Die Act,” slamming the package over cuts to Medicaid… READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, Elon Musk, and President Trump.
“What we really need to do is be willing to get shot.” Those words to a Democratic member are part of a chilling Axios story on the rising violent rhetoric on the American left. As alleged Antifa members are arrested in Texas for the attempted murder of ICE agents, Democratic members are beginning to express private concerns over unleashing uncontrollable rage after their election defeat.
Axios reported on conversations with Democratic members who admit that followers are turning to violence and rejecting messages of political reform.
One House member explained that there is a “sense of fear and despair and anger” among voters that “puts us in a different position where … we can’t keep following norms of decorum.” The member does not address how Democratic leaders are fueling the rising violent rhetoric and imagery (including the most recent posted picture of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D., N.Y.) brandishing a baseball bat).
One House Democrat told Axios, “Some of them have suggested … what we really need to do is be willing to get shot.”
Yet another admitted that constituents have told them to prepare for “violence … to fight to protect our democracy.” Others reported that liberals are talking about the need “to storm the White House and stuff like that.”
One explained that “They’re angry beyond things.” Another said, “It’s like … the Roman coliseum. People just want more and more of this spectacle.”
Some are discussing triggering or staging violence. One member said, “What I have seen is a demand that we get ourselves arrested intentionally or allow ourselves to be victims of violence, and … a lot of times that’s coming from economically very secure white people.”
We have recently seen such performative acts with members like Sen. Alex Padilla (D., Cal.) heckling a press conference by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Democratic members storming an ICE facility.
In one encounter, a lawmaker told Axios: “I actually said in a meeting, ‘When they light a fire, my thought is to grab an extinguisher’. And someone at the table said, ‘Have you tried gasoline?’”
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D, Mass.) declared, “Elon Musk is seizing the power that belongs to the American people.” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D, Md.) claimed on MSNBC’s “The ReidOut” that Musk and Trump were conducting a “rapidly expanding and accelerating coup.”
Sen. Ron Wyden (D., Ore.) appeared to be working off the same talking point and declared that a “coup” was being carried out. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) warned that Musk was “taking away everything we have.” Rep. Maxine Waters (D., Cal.) said, “We are here to fight back.” Sen. Cory Booker (D., NJ) called on citizens to “fight” and declared, “We will rise up.”
Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D., TX) yelled, “We are gonna be in your face, we are gonna be on your a–es, and we are going to make sure you understand what democracy looks like, and this ain’t it.” Rep. LaMonica McIver (D., N.J.) added: “God d—it shut down the Senate!…WE ARE AT WAR!” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., called for Democrats to fight “in the streets.””
Such rhetoric can inspire unhinged citizens who actually believe that this is a war against a coup. It is the type of rhetoric that can prompt anti-Republican Nicholas John Roske to try to assassinate Justice Brett Kavanaugh or Sanders supporter James T. Hodgkinson to try to massacre Republican members playing softball.
This week, the Department of Justice announced the arrest of ten alleged Antifa members who are being charged in an ambush of ICE agents in Alvarado, Texas, on July 4. Democratic members have long played a dangerous game in dismissing the violence or even the existence of groups like Antifa. Despite the denial of its existence by figures like Rep. Jerry Nadler (D., N.Y.), I have long written and spoken about the threat of Antifa to free speech on our campuses and in our communities. This includes testimony before Congress on Antifa’s central role in the nationwide anti-free speech movement. We have continued to follow the attacks and arrests of Antifa followers across the country, including attacks on journalists.
Nevertheless, former Democratic National Committee deputy chair Keith Ellison, now the Minnesota attorney general, once said Antifa would “strike fear in the heart” of Trump. Ellison’s son, Minneapolis City Council member Jeremiah Ellison, declared his allegiance to Antifa in the heat of the protests this summer.
Liberal sites have sold Antifa items, including baby outfits, to celebrate the violent group.
Now, Democratic leaders are privately expressing alarm that their followers are demanding violence and rejecting moderate language. Yet, many are fueling that rage and few of their colleagues are speaking out against them. The party is attempting to ride this wave of rage to victory. However, history shows that the enablers of the mob today often find themselves the enemies of the mob tomorrow.
Democratic lawmakers say their voters are enraged at the lack of ability to counter President Donald Trump’s agenda, with some saying they could resort to “violence,” Axios reported Monday.
The outlet says it spoke to over two dozen House Democrats to measure the temperature of the Democratic base. What it found was red-hot anger and a burgeoning desire to circumvent the rule of law, where explanations that Democrats simply don’t hold enough power in Washington fall on deaf ears.
“We’ve got people who are desperately wanting us to do something… no matter what we say, they want [more],” Rep. Brad Schneider, D-Ill., told the outlet.
Most of the lawmakers spoke on condition of anonymity. Schneider’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries rallies Democrats against the Republican budget plan on the House steps at the Capitol in Washington. (AP/J. Scott Applewhite)
“Our own base is telling us that what we’re doing is not good enough… [that] there needs to be blood to grab the attention of the press and the public,” one such lawmaker said.
Another said their constituents are convinced that “civility isn’t working” and that they should prepare for “violence… to fight to protect our democracy.”
A third lawmaker described some of the messages from people online as “crazy ****,” saying that some told them to “storm the White House and stuff like that.”
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital.
Rep. Brad Schneider said Democratic voters want “more” resistance to Trump. (Reuters/Sarah Silbiger)
Another lawmaker compared Democratic voters to the “Roman coliseum.” “People just want more and more of this spectacle,” the lawmaker said.
Other constituents have insisted that lawmakers take on the risk themselves, with one lawmaker saying they were told they should be willing to get “shot.”
“What I have seen is a demand that we get ourselves arrested intentionally or allow ourselves to be victims of violence, and… a lot of times that’s coming from economically very secure White people,” another lawmaker said.
“I actually said in a meeting, ‘When they light a fire, my thought is to grab an extinguisher,'” the lawmaker detailed.
“And someone at the table said, ‘Have you tried gasoline?'” they added.
Anders Hagstrom is a reporter with Fox News Digital covering national politics and major breaking news events. Send tips to Anders.Hagstrom@Fox.com, or on Twitter: @Hagstrom_Anders.
A Texas state flag flies in a yard filled with debris on July 6 in Hunt, Texas. (Jim Vondruska via Getty Images)
Heavy rainstorms caused widespread, deadly floods in Texas over the Fourth of July Weekend.
According to the latest estimates, 94 people have been confirmed dead due to the flooding of the Guadalupe River and elsewhere in Central Texas. This number includes 27 young girls and counselors from Camp Mystic, a Christian camp in Hunt, Texas.
Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, who represents a district affected by the flooding, spoke about both the tragedies and acts of heroism in the wake of the flood.
Rep. Roy: “There's a there's a lot of pride and the people of Texas rising to the occasion.“ pic.twitter.com/SETsgDsyHT
— Rep. Chip Roy Press Office (@RepChipRoy) July 7, 2025
Unfortunately, some media commentators took this tragic moment and wrongly twisted it to make it an indictment of President Donald Trump, the Trump administration, and conservatives in general. Many claimed that Department of Government Efficiency budget cuts are specifically to blame for the casualties.
This was CNN White House reporter Betsy Klein on Saturday in the 5pm Eastern hour, speculating about DOGE cuts having possibly played a role in the deadly Texas floods (with dozens still missing):
“But there are two important notes here. Number one, the President has been deeply… pic.twitter.com/YzKBibYJle
“MAGA and [right-wing] media seem very upset today as a chorus of us experts discuss the impact of cuts to weather forecasting,” wrote CNN analyst Juliette Kayyem on X. “This is the world of disaster information wars. I say this: a total tragedy in Texas and we owe those young girls the willingness to learn from it.”
The following is a fact check of these claims.
National Weather Service
Critics of the Trump administration have directed most of their ire at the National Weather Service, saying that after funding “cuts” the organization failed to do its job in Texas.
When experts warned for months that the NWS “is being destroyed” by Trump’s personnel cuts, Howard Lutnick assured Congress that forecasting won’t be affected. Now TX officials are blaming a faulty forecast by NWS for the deadly impact of a storm. https://t.co/zQZmKq7553
A Huffington Post White House reporter said that Trump “imposed significant cuts to the National Weather Service, degrading its ability to do its job.”
He imposed significant cuts to the National Weather Service, degrading its ability to do its job.
Also he has not visited the site of a single disaster that has occurred on his watch.
However, he has managed close to 50 days of golf, including today, right now. pic.twitter.com/dJfbDKcThF
ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos said on Sunday, “We’re also learning there were significant staffing shortfalls to the National Weather Services offices in the region.”
George Stephanopoulos on @ThisWeekABC: “We’re also learning there were significant staffing shortfalls to the National Weather Services offices in the region.” pic.twitter.com/1xwf7DkQuq
Even the Democratic National Committee got in on these accusations Monday.
INBOX: Democratic National Committee doubles down on blaming Texas flooding deaths on Trump admin staff cuts to the National Weather Service.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt just called such claims a "depraved lie that serves no purpose during this time of national… pic.twitter.com/YDLvNfBwif
However, not only have there been no cuts to NWS or National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, but it appears that those agencies were well and properly staffed on the eve of the floods.
The Associated Press reported that the NWS office in New Braunfels “had extra staff on duty during the storms.” Whereas during normal times two forecasters would be on duty, the office had five forecasters on duty ahead of the storms, according to AP.
But most evidence points to NWS fulfilling its duty and providing warnings well ahead of the floods.
The Department of Homeland Security posted its own accounting of events and said that the “mainstream media is deliberately lying about the events leading up to the catastrophic flooding in Texas.”
The GOP’s budget cuts to NOAA are set to take effect at the start of fiscal year 2026, which begins on October 1, 2025.
Anyone making the deaths of the children in Texas about partisan politics is morally bankrupt. Please reflect.
After posting a timeline of the actions the NWS took, DHS concluded, “The National Weather Service provided over 12 hours of advance notice via the Flood Watch and over 3 hours of lead time for Flash Flood Warnings, with escalated alerts as the storm intensified.”
Some media outlets have also concluded that NWS was not to blame for what happened in Texas. A Wired article acknowledged that NWS “did its job in Texas” based on interviews with meteorologists.
Wired reported that NWS “did send out adequate warnings as it got updated information. By Thursday afternoon, it had issued a flood watch for the area, and a flash flood warning was in effect by 1 a.m. Friday. The agency had issued a flash flood emergency alert by 4:30 a.m.”
Some commentators on the Left didn’t buy the narrative that the Texas flood deaths were caused by budget cuts and the Trump administration.
Nina Turner, a former national co-chair of Sen. Bernie Sanders 2020 presidential campaign, wrote on X that the “GOP’s budget cuts to NOAA are set to take effect at the start of fiscal year 2026, which begins on October 1, 2025.”
Rep. Joaquin Castro on the deadly Texas flooding:
"I think climate change is obviously a part of it. These floods are happening more often."pic.twitter.com/iNFu8rx8MH
Turner said that, while she disagrees with the budget cuts, “anyone making the deaths of the children in Texas about partisan politics is morally bankrupt. Please reflect.”
Climate Change
Another common narrative of the Texas flood deaths is that they were caused by climate change.
More Pielke: "The flooding was certainly extreme but it should not have been historically unexpected. The documented record of extreme flooding in “flash flood alley” goes back several centuries, with paleoclimatology records extending that record thousands of years into the… pic.twitter.com/QdwJXCqJ3k
— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) July 7, 2025
The Texas flood occurred in an area that suffers regular, extreme flooding. Some have called it “flash flood alley.”
But according to a meteorologist on X, citing numbers from the Environmental Protection Agency, the number of floods in the affected part of Texas has actually decreased since 1965.
Journalist Michael Shellenberger explained on X that flood deaths in the United States have declined sharply in the last century because better systems are now in place to save lives.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) denies that DOGE cuts to National Weather Service staffing led to delays in warnings about the deadly floods in Texas.
He says it's "reasonable over time" to look back at "what could have been done better," but "immediately trying to use it, for either side,… pic.twitter.com/DQ8UY5CwcC
The problem, according to Shellenberger and others, was not with the National Weather Service or with DOGE cuts. The problem is that there wasn’t a sufficient local flood warning system in place to ensure that people in the affected areas could escape harm.
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said in a news conference that it is “reasonable over time” to look back at “what could have been done better” during the Texas floods, but “immediately trying to use it, for either side, to attack their political opponents—I think that’s cynical and not the right approach.”
Below is my column in The Hill on calls from the left for other countries to hit the United States with sanctions and other measures as a “bad actor.” After losses in elections and Congress, some are sending out a “broken arrow” signal for other nations to crack down on the United States.
Here is the column:
“Broken arrow” is arguably the most chilling and desperate order that an American military commander can issue. When faced with an enemy about to overrun a surrounded force, a commander uses it to call in an air or artillery strike on his own position.
This month, many on the American left are issuing their own “broken arrow” signals, including calling on globalist allies to hit the U.S. with sanctions and other measures. They are seeking to achieve through sanctions what they could not achieve through elections. The most recent such call came from commentator Elie Mystal on “The Joy Reid Show” this week.
“Our country needs to be sanctioned,” he said. “We are the bad guys on the world stage. We are a menace to not only free people everywhere, but we are a menace to peaceful people everywhere at this point, and I’m not even going to say that we’ve only been a menace for the past three or four months.”
Mystal’s call was hardly a surprise for those familiar with his writings. A regular commentator on MSNBC, he previously called the Constitution “trash” and urged not just the abolition of the U.S. Senate but also of “all voter registration laws.” Yet, he is not alone in signaling that his position is being overrun by his fellow citizens.
After Elon Musk bought Twitter with a pledge to dismantle its censorship system, former Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton called upon Europe to use its infamous Digital Services Act to force him to censor fellow Americans.
To the delight of globalists, she declared, “Before I describe the details of Russia’s recent online influence campaigns, I would like to call upon you to stand firm against another autocracy: The United States of America.”
This year, I spoke in Berlin at the World Forum and was surprised to see many Americans joining European leaders in support of the forum’s slogan, “A New World Order with European Values.” Attended by figures such as Bill and Hillary Clinton, the conference heralded Europe as key to countering the threat posed by the U.S. Others denounced America as the world’s villain with boycotts and protests during Fourth of July celebrations. One leading influencer declared that “this country is beyond f**ked” and encouraged citizens to “walk away from the illusion that they built” around this country.
The crisis of faith on the left often seems to be triggered by any adverse decision or election. In 2022, the Pima County, Arizona Democratic Party tweeted“F–k the Fourth” after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.
This year, Fourth of July celebrations were canceled in Los Angeles under the claim that officials feared a mass arrest by ICE — rather implausible, considering that protests against ICE will be held as planned.
Others are organizing protests this week, declaring“F**k fourth of July. We have a king that we need to get rid of first.”
The problem for those calling on the EU to fight the U.S. is democracy itself, something of a headache for the global elite in Brussels. European governments are cracking down on conservative and other groups, which are soaring in popularity, with calls for stronger borders and reversing mass immigration trends. Great Britain, France, Italy, Germany, and other countries have experienced a similar surge in the popularity of conservative parties.
The fact is, many of the triggers for these “No Kings” protests are the product of the democratic process from the “Big Beautiful Bill” to changes in immigration policy. Citizens voted for change and successfully secured it, and some people are angry about it.
At the same time, our courts continue to function as designed in reviewing these orders and policies. Trump has won some and lost some before the Supreme Court, as constitutional limits are defined and enforced.
In my forthcoming book, Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution, I explore the future of American democracy in the 21st Century in light of economic and political movements, including the current crisis of faith of many on the left over our fundamental values and institutions.
The irony is that this crisis is largely centered among the most privileged classes. Yet recent Gallup polling shows patriotism is at an all-time low. However, the drop is found almost entirely among Democrats. Only 36 percent of Democrats reported being extremely or very proud to be American, compared to 92 percent of Republicans.
Some are simply moving to foreign countries. The New York Times has fanned the flames of those claiming that the U.S. is a new fascist regime. Recently, it featured the declaration of three Yale professors fleeing American fascism for the free nation of Canada. In their piece, titled “We study fascism and we are leaving the United States,” the professors explain that “the lesson of 1933 is that you get out sooner rather than later.”
But what these professors call fascism looks a lot like the democratic process to others. The problem with democracy is that it does not always produce the outcome you want.
For some, support for democratic choice seems to extend only to fellow citizens who make the “right” choice, from their own perspective, of course. So faced with losses in elections and in Congress, many are shouting “broken arrow” and hoping for external help in crushing the opposition.
Yet the fact is, this country is not being “overrun.” Those are fellow citizens who are calling for these policy changes and rejecting far-left policies. Just as many in Europe are calling on the EU to block far-right democratic victories, many in this country are advocating for the trashing of the Constitution or transnational interventions to reverse political voting trends.
The fact is, the far left is not truly surrounded. They have simply retreated into smaller and smaller echo chambers rather than engage the rest of the country on these issues. Viewed from within the protected spaces of MSNBC or BlueSky, you can feel surrounded, but it remains a type of self-isolation. It is like watching wagons frantically circling on the plains without a hostile in sight. The problem is that most of America has moved on.
In the end, the calls for a globalist intervention are a final desperate call of America’s self-isolated left.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and the best-selling author of “The Indispensable Right.”
During the Fourth of July weekend, Chicago witnessed a surge in violent crime, with over 50 individuals shot and six fatalities reported. The city, infamous for such incidents, saw a series of mass and drive-by shootings between Thursday, July 3, and Sunday night. ABC 7 reported that on Saturday morning, a mass shooting in the Little Village neighborhood left four injured, three critically, when suspects in an SUV opened fire on a group.
Later that day, the violence continued with two separate fatal shootings. A 46-year-old man was shot dead while sitting in his vehicle in Lake View, with a suspect now in custody. Another victim, a 30-year-old man, was discovered with a gunshot wound to the head on the West Side, and detectives are currently on the case.
The South Side of Chicago saw a flurry of shootings on Friday night. Among the victims was Marco A. Velasquez-Sierra, 36, who was found dead with a headshot wound, and no suspects have been detained. During the same period, two unidentified males opened fire on a crowd, injuring seven, with two in critical condition.
A separate incident involved another male suspect who shot a 16-year-old girl and a 35-year-old man. The young girl, Meeyah Smith, tragically succumbed to her injuries from a gunshot wound to the throat. No arrests have been made in connection with this shooting.
In the early hours of Thursday, two women were victims of a shooting during an attempted robbery in their home on the South Side. The confrontation turned deadly, resulting in the death of a 29-year-old woman. The suspect remains unidentified as the investigation proceeds.
That same morning, a 21-year-old man was killed in a drive-by shooting, adding to the grim tally. The violence continued with two mass shootings, one injuring four and another three, as recorded by ABC 7. City data reveals a staggering 205 homicides in Chicago this year, with 170 resulting from gun violence.
Over the Memorial Day weekend, the city faced another wave of violence, with 22 people shot, including two fatalities. Despite repeated inquiries, the Chicago Police Department and Mayor Brandon Johnson’s office have not provided comments. These incidents underscore ongoing challenges in addressing crime and ensuring public safety.
Peter D’Abrosca, who joined Fox News Digital in 2025, reported these events, drawing from his experience at The Tennessee Star. D’Abrosca, originally from Rhode Island, is an Elon University graduate. His reporting continues to shed light on the pressing issues facing cities like Chicago.
The increase in violent crimes raises questions about current strategies and the effectiveness of law enforcement. Community leaders and officials are urged to take decisive action to curb this alarming trend. The public’s safety remains a top priority, demanding collaborative efforts to restore peace.
The significance of these events extends beyond the immediate loss, impacting the community’s sense of security. Many residents are calling for a stronger response from authorities to prevent future tragedies. The ongoing violence highlights the need for comprehensive solutions and proactive measures.
As Chicago grapples with these challenges, the spotlight is on policymakers to implement effective crime prevention tactics. The city’s reputation as a crime hotspot necessitates urgent attention and innovative approaches. Residents continue to hope for a safer environment for themselves and their families.
The broader implications of these incidents reflect the pressing need for reforms in public safety policies. Addressing the root causes of violence is essential in creating lasting change. Stakeholders from various sectors must unite in their efforts to address these critical issues.
The tragic events serve as a stark reminder of the work that remains in combating urban violence. As the community mourns, there is a renewed call for action and accountability from those in power. The path forward requires a concerted effort to bring about meaningful improvements.
In the face of adversity, the resilience of Chicago’s residents remains evident. Their determination to seek justice and advocate for change is unwavering. The ongoing dialogue between citizens and officials is crucial in driving progress.
Ultimately, the goal is to transform Chicago into a safer, more secure city for all its inhabitants. This vision demands commitment and collaboration from every corner of the community. The journey toward healing and restoration is underway, with hope as the guiding force.
Brittany Mays is a dedicated mother and passionate conservative news and opinion writer. With a sharp eye for current events and a commitment to traditional values, Brittany delivers thoughtful commentary on the issues shaping today’s world. Balancing her role as a parent with her love for writing, she strives to inspire others with her insights on faith, family, and freedom.
• President Donald Trump Signs Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood • Wisconsin Supreme Court Strikes Down State’s Abortion Ban •Abortionist Charged With Murder After Leaving Newborn to Die •Massachusetts Planned Parenthood Will Lose $14 Million, May Close •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Heartfelt Media Group is calling on singers of all backgrounds to record themselves as part of a virtual community chorus for an upcoming song release affirming the sanctity of life. For more details or to receive a demo, visit https://rescue.heartfeltmg.com “
•South Carolina Abortions Drop 63% as Heartbeat Law Saves Babies •Wisconsin Supreme Court Strikes Down State’s Abortion Ban •New Ad Blasts Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz, Pushes for Defunding •Abortionist Chopped Off Baby’s Limbs, Left Rest of the Body Inside Mother •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Heartfelt Media Group is calling on singers of all backgrounds to record themselves as part of a virtual community chorus for an upcoming song release affirming the sanctity of life. For more details or to receive a demo, visit https://rescue.heartfeltmg.com “
Hundreds of far-left agitators, masquerading as “protesters,” brought chaos to downtown Los Angeles yet again on Tuesday, shutting down the Sixth Street bridge in another brazen display of lawlessness. Holding signs like “Eviction Moratorium Now!” and “ICE out of LA!”, these radicals blocked all lanes of traffic, disrupting the lives of hardworking citizens while the LAPD stood by—issuing social media updates instead of making arrests.
The scene was captured by KABC, which reported: “A large group of protesters shut down the Sixth Street bridge in downtown Los Angeles Tuesday afternoon. The demonstration blocked all eastbound and westbound lanes. AIR7 was above the scene and captured several dozen protesters walking on the bridge, many holding signs and waving flags. A large sign hanging on the bridge read ‘Sick of ICE!’ and a parked truck had a sign that read ‘ICE out of L.A.!’”
⚠️Traffic Advisory⚠️ Demonstration has reversed course and now marching EB 6th St Bridge towards Boyle St.
— LAPD Central Division (@LAPDCentral) July 1, 2025
Rather than enforcing the law, the LAPD took to X (formerly Twitter) to inform the public which direction the mob was heading—effectively aiding their disruption instead of stopping it. This is the same city where, just days earlier, anti-ICE rioters ran rampant through downtown Los Angeles, burning cars, assaulting federal agents, and destroying private property. Yet, the liberal media remains eerily silent, refusing to condemn the violence while continuing to smear conservatives and patriots as the real threats to democracy.
A large group of protesters shut down the Sixth Street bridge in downtown Los Angeles Tuesday afternoon.
AIR7 was above the scene and captured several dozen protesters walking on the bridge, many holding signs and waving flags. A large sign hanging on the bridge read "Sick of… pic.twitter.com/ki3t40pkwE
President Donald Trump, who has long warned about the dangers of unchecked leftist mobs, has repeatedly called for law and order. Unlike the weak leadership in California, Trump understands that true justice means protecting innocent citizens from anarchists who hijack peaceful protests to push their radical agenda. While Democrats and their media allies enable this chaos, Trump stands firm in his commitment to securing our borders and supporting ICE—the very agency these rioters want abolished.
Transcript from KABC Report: “A large group of protesters shut down the Sixth Street bridge in downtown Los Angeles Tuesday afternoon. The demonstration blocked all eastbound and westbound lanes. AIR7 was above the scene and captured several dozen protesters walking on the bridge, many holding signs and waving flags. A large sign hanging on the bridge read ‘Sick of ICE!’ and a parked truck had a sign that read ‘ICE out of L.A.!’”
Americans have yet another compelling reason to reconsider their involvement in Gaza, where millions of taxpayer dollars support its inhabitants. Fox News recently reported that Hamas has placed bounties on the staff of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), targeting both U.S. and local workers. This alarming development follows the Trump administration’s decision to approve an additional $30 million in aid to Gaza.
While Christian communities face persecution in regions like Nigeria and Syria, they receive little to no international assistance. Meanwhile, those impacted by hurricanes in the United States have struggled to receive federal aid, highlighting a disparity in the allocation of resources. The global stage is witnessing a less-than-stellar performance from America, as important domestic and international needs remain unmet.
The GHF has confirmed to Fox News that credible reports indicate Hamas is actively targeting their organization. Bounties have been placed on American security personnel and Palestinian aid workers, offering financial rewards for harm inflicted. Such actions underscore the volatile environment humanitarian workers face in Gaza.
In a strategic move, Hamas has stationed “armed operatives” near humanitarian zones, aiming to disrupt the only reliable aid delivery system in the area. This month, a deadly attack by Hamas resulted in the deaths of 12 GHF workers, with others reportedly tortured. These victims were local workers, demonstrating the indiscriminate nature of the violence.
Despite years of aid from the U.S. and Israel, the majority of Gazans continue to support jihadist ideologies. The persistent animosity toward Westerners, Christians, and Jews remains unchanged. The deeply rooted belief in perpetual jihad among devout Muslims presents an ongoing challenge for international relations.
President Donald Trump was reminded of this harsh reality when Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, showed no gratitude after being spared from an Israeli assassination plot. Trump’s surprise at Khamenei’s continued hostility highlights the complexity of dealing with such adversaries. The unyielding stance of certain leaders poses significant barriers to peace.
Efforts to negotiate or incentivize a departure from violence have consistently proven ineffective. The foundational teachings of Islam, with their historical implications, persist as barriers to change. Recent events, such as those in Kuala Lumpur, illustrate the cycle of violence that follows Palestinian movements globally.
Hamas’s actions against aid workers are likely to continue, fueled by local support for jihad against Israel. The situation in Gaza appears dire, with few viable solutions on the horizon. Some argue that the only resolution lies in Israel reclaiming control over Gaza and eliminating the threat posed by Hamas.
The complexities of international aid and foreign policy are underscored by these ongoing challenges. The need for a strategic reevaluation of resource allocation and diplomatic efforts is evident. America’s role on the world stage is under scrutiny, with a pressing need for effective solutions.
While the plight of those in conflict zones continues, so does the debate over American involvement. The balance between domestic responsibilities and international aid is a contentious issue. As the situation in Gaza evolves, global attention remains fixed on the outcomes of these intricate dynamics.
The resilience of humanitarian organizations like GHF is tested daily in hostile environments. Their commitment to aiding those in need, despite significant risks, is commendable. However, the sustainability of such efforts is questionable in the face of persistent threats.
The geopolitical landscape is fraught with challenges that demand careful navigation. America’s decisions in foreign policy have far-reaching implications, affecting both allies and adversaries. The pursuit of lasting peace requires a nuanced approach, informed by historical context and current realities.
The international community watches closely as tensions in Gaza persist. The interplay between aid, diplomacy, and military strategy is complex and multifaceted. As stakeholders assess the situation, the search for viable paths forward continues.
In the midst of global challenges, the role of leadership is critical. Policymakers must weigh the consequences of their decisions with regard to both domestic and international impact. The effectiveness of such leadership is measured by its ability to foster stability and progress.
The narrative surrounding Gaza and similar conflicts is shaped by diverse perspectives. Each viewpoint contributes to the broader discourse on international relations and humanitarian aid. Understanding these perspectives is key to addressing the root causes of unrest.
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
NEWSMAX
News, Opinion, Interviews, Research and discussion
Opinion
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
You Version
Bible Translations, Devotional Tools and Plans, BLOG, free mobile application; notes and more
Political
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
NEWSMAX
News, Opinion, Interviews, Research and discussion
Spiritual
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
Bible Gateway
The Bible Gateway is a tool for reading and researching scripture online — all in the language or translation of your choice! It provides advanced searching capabilities, which allow readers to find and compare particular passages in scripture based on
What Did You Say? 
‘Hit Us, Please’ — America’s Left Issues a ‘Broken Arrow’ Signal to Europe
By: Jonathan Turley | July 7, 2025
Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2025/07/07/hit-us-please-americas-left-issues-a-broken-arrow-signal-to-europe/
Below is my column in The Hill on calls from the left for other countries to hit the United States with sanctions and other measures as a “bad actor.” After losses in elections and Congress, some are sending out a “broken arrow” signal for other nations to crack down on the United States.
Here is the column:
“Broken arrow” is arguably the most chilling and desperate order that an American military commander can issue. When faced with an enemy about to overrun a surrounded force, a commander uses it to call in an air or artillery strike on his own position.
This month, many on the American left are issuing their own “broken arrow” signals, including calling on globalist allies to hit the U.S. with sanctions and other measures. They are seeking to achieve through sanctions what they could not achieve through elections. The most recent such call came from commentator Elie Mystal on “The Joy Reid Show” this week.
Mystal’s call was hardly a surprise for those familiar with his writings. A regular commentator on MSNBC, he previously called the Constitution “trash” and urged not just the abolition of the U.S. Senate but also of “all voter registration laws.” Yet, he is not alone in signaling that his position is being overrun by his fellow citizens.
After Elon Musk bought Twitter with a pledge to dismantle its censorship system, former Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton called upon Europe to use its infamous Digital Services Act to force him to censor fellow Americans.
Nina Jankowicz, the former head of Biden’s infamous Disinformation Governance Board, appeared recently before the European Parliament. She called upon the 27 EU countries to fight against the U.S., which she described as a global threat.
This year, I spoke in Berlin at the World Forum and was surprised to see many Americans joining European leaders in support of the forum’s slogan, “A New World Order with European Values.” Attended by figures such as Bill and Hillary Clinton, the conference heralded Europe as key to countering the threat posed by the U.S. Others denounced America as the world’s villain with boycotts and protests during Fourth of July celebrations. One leading influencer declared that “this country is beyond f**ked” and encouraged citizens to “walk away from the illusion that they built” around this country.
Democratic politicians and pundits have fueled the anger by claiming fighting the current U.S. government is like fighting against the Nazis, including most recently former Vice President Al Gore. Others like Rep. Pramila Jayapal have called ICE agents “terrorists” for enforcing immigration laws.
The crisis of faith on the left often seems to be triggered by any adverse decision or election. In 2022, the Pima County, Arizona Democratic Party tweeted “F–k the Fourth” after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.
This year, Fourth of July celebrations were canceled in Los Angeles under the claim that officials feared a mass arrest by ICE — rather implausible, considering that protests against ICE will be held as planned.
Others are organizing protests this week, declaring “F**k fourth of July. We have a king that we need to get rid of first.”
The problem for those calling on the EU to fight the U.S. is democracy itself, something of a headache for the global elite in Brussels. European governments are cracking down on conservative and other groups, which are soaring in popularity, with calls for stronger borders and reversing mass immigration trends. Great Britain, France, Italy, Germany, and other countries have experienced a similar surge in the popularity of conservative parties.
The fact is, many of the triggers for these “No Kings” protests are the product of the democratic process from the “Big Beautiful Bill” to changes in immigration policy. Citizens voted for change and successfully secured it, and some people are angry about it.
At the same time, our courts continue to function as designed in reviewing these orders and policies. Trump has won some and lost some before the Supreme Court, as constitutional limits are defined and enforced.
In my forthcoming book, Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution, I explore the future of American democracy in the 21st Century in light of economic and political movements, including the current crisis of faith of many on the left over our fundamental values and institutions.
The irony is that this crisis is largely centered among the most privileged classes. Yet recent Gallup polling shows patriotism is at an all-time low. However, the drop is found almost entirely among Democrats. Only 36 percent of Democrats reported being extremely or very proud to be American, compared to 92 percent of Republicans.
Some are simply moving to foreign countries. The New York Times has fanned the flames of those claiming that the U.S. is a new fascist regime. Recently, it featured the declaration of three Yale professors fleeing American fascism for the free nation of Canada. In their piece, titled “We study fascism and we are leaving the United States,” the professors explain that “the lesson of 1933 is that you get out sooner rather than later.”
But what these professors call fascism looks a lot like the democratic process to others. The problem with democracy is that it does not always produce the outcome you want.
For some, support for democratic choice seems to extend only to fellow citizens who make the “right” choice, from their own perspective, of course. So faced with losses in elections and in Congress, many are shouting “broken arrow” and hoping for external help in crushing the opposition.
Yet the fact is, this country is not being “overrun.” Those are fellow citizens who are calling for these policy changes and rejecting far-left policies. Just as many in Europe are calling on the EU to block far-right democratic victories, many in this country are advocating for the trashing of the Constitution or transnational interventions to reverse political voting trends.
The fact is, the far left is not truly surrounded. They have simply retreated into smaller and smaller echo chambers rather than engage the rest of the country on these issues. Viewed from within the protected spaces of MSNBC or BlueSky, you can feel surrounded, but it remains a type of self-isolation. It is like watching wagons frantically circling on the plains without a hostile in sight. The problem is that most of America has moved on.
In the end, the calls for a globalist intervention are a final desperate call of America’s self-isolated left.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and the best-selling author of “The Indispensable Right.”
Share this:
Category:
International Politics
Leave a comment
Tagged with: