Mark Zuckerberg’s Metaverse may not be the next big thing after all.

It hasn’t been that long since the Metaverse was the place to be, with celebrities like Snoop Dogg saying he would start a new record label and social media giants the Nelk Boys promising fans exclusive experiences.

Several sources are reporting that Reality Labs, Meta’s division that works on virtual reality headsets, smart glasses, and wristbands, is dumping around 10% of its workforce.

‘About 80% of users are reportedly under the age of 16 years old.’

The New York Times reports this could amount to somewhere around 1,000-1,500 employees and “disproportionately” affect those who work on the Metaverse and virtual-reality-based social media networking. Bloomberg’s report echoed similar numbers and said Meta is cutting back on virtual reality investments. A Meta spokesperson told Return the Bloomberg report is accurate.

CEO Zuckerberg may no longer think his prized avatar world is the future. He reportedly wants money reallocated from VR goggles and the Metaverse toward his wearables division, to push smart glasses and wristband computing.

For example, Meta is famously partnered with Ray-Ban glasses for video recording and AI integration into the user’s point of view.

RELATED: Zuckerberg names ex-White House deputy Meta’s new president — and Trump LOVES it

It is difficult to gauge the active users in the Metaverse. In 2022, the internet was rife with stories of barren online wastelands such as Decentraland and Sandbox’s $1.3 billion disaster that was garnering fewer than 1,000 daily active users.

As Blaze News reported in December, Meta had recently revealed it spent $77 billion on its overall VR strategy that included Meta Quest hardware (headsets) and Meta Horizon, its Metaverse social platform.

“We said last month that we were shifting some of our investment from Metaverse toward wearables,” a Meta spokesperson told Return. “This is part of that effort, and we plan to reinvest the savings to support the growth of wearables this year.”

Current estimates have the active user count for the Metaverse, overall, at somewhere between 400 and 600 million. About 80% of users are reportedly under the age of 16 years old, and half of all users are under 13.

Last year, the company said it had significant growth in sales for its VR headsets and increased payment volume on its platform by 12%. This came with a 10% overall increase in monthly time spent on its media apps, Meta’s VP of Metaverse content, Samantha Ryan, wrote in 2024.

RELATED: Charlie Kirk murder online role play banned from Grand Theft Auto: ‘Tasteless, unacceptable’

Still, Zuckerberg has made it clear that the company is shifting toward its wearable technology and AI, including what it takes to power it.

With plans to build new massive data centers, Zuckerberg has promised to deliver “personal superintelligence,” confirming in recent remarks that the company will continue to “invest in and finance Meta’s AI and infrastructure.”

The company says it will focus on experiences with mobile phones for the Metaverse, instead of VR headsets.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Return, Metaverse, Meta, Zuckerberg, Vr, Virtual reality, Ai, Tech 

Speed limits are the most ignored law in America. Everyone knows it, everyone does it, and politicians pretend they don’t.

Yet despite near-universal noncompliance, speed limits keep trending upward. That sounds backward — but there’s a reason. And if we want safer, smarter roads, we need to be honest about how limits are set, why they fail, and what would actually fix them.

Speed limits aren’t broken because speed itself is dangerous. They’re broken because the system is disconnected from reality.

This isn’t about reckless driving. It’s about reality. America’s speed policy is built on outdated assumptions, inconsistent enforcement, and political fights that have little to do with safety. Dig into the data and one thing becomes clear: The current system isn’t working.

And no — an American Autobahn isn’t coming anytime soon.

The risk everyone ignores

Speed limits aren’t chosen on a whim. They’re usually based on the 85th percentile rule: Engineers measure how fast drivers already travel, and the speed that 85% stay under becomes the benchmark.

In theory, this reflects real-world behavior. In practice, when most drivers already exceed posted limits, every traffic study pushes numbers higher. It becomes a feedback loop: People speed, limits rise, people keep speeding. The result isn’t safer roads — it’s inconsistency, which is far more dangerous than speed alone.

Safety debates fixate on top speed, but the real danger is speed variability — the difference between how fast vehicles are moving relative to each other.

A road where some drivers do 55 mph and others do 80 mph is dangerous not because of the fastest car, but because of the difference. High variability leads to congestion, abrupt lane changes, tailgating, and road rage. Uniform speeds are far safer. America fails here because limits don’t match behavior, enforcement is sporadic, and real-world speeds vary wildly.

Unsafe at any speed

Some argue we should simply raise limits to match reality. But the data doesn’t support that.

Outdated limits do breed distrust, but raising limits without fixing enforcement, road design, and driver training only widens speed differences. There’s also a political ceiling: Higher limits face resistance that has little to do with safety.

Insurance companies have long resisted higher limits. Greater speeds can mean more severe crashes, higher payouts, and larger claims — so insurers lobby accordingly.

Then there’s Vision Zero and its “safety over speed” movement, which prioritizes lower limits, stricter enforcement, and speed cameras to reduce fatalities. Critics argue it oversimplifies the problem by blaming speed while ignoring poor infrastructure, distracted driving, and inconsistent enforcement. The result is a political stalemate divorced from what actually works.

Why we can’t drive 55 … or 85

The Autobahn always comes up in these debates, and for good reason. It works because everything aligns.

German driver training is rigorous, emphasizing lane discipline and high-speed control. Left lanes are strictly for passing. Roads are engineered for sustained speed. Enforcement is consistent and focused on the right behaviors — tailgating, lane blocking, and distraction.

You can’t copy just one piece of that system and expect the same result.

The national 55 mph limit of the 1970s was widely ignored and eventually repealed. Safety gains were modest and short-lived, while frustration and economic costs were substantial. Arbitrary limits without public trust don’t last.

RELATED: Mandatory speed limiters for all new cars — will American drivers stand for it?

Vintage Images/Getty Images

Brake check

Do speed limits actually work?

Yes — but only when they align with road design, real driving behavior, consistent enforcement, competent driver training, and low speed variability. Right now, America misses on nearly all counts.

Speed limits aren’t broken because speed itself is dangerous. They’re broken because the system is disconnected from reality. The solution isn’t simply raising or lowering numbers — it’s aligning engineering, enforcement, training, and expectations.

America’s biggest problem isn’t speed. It’s inconsistency. Until that changes, noncompliance will continue — and so will preventable crashes. Smarter speed policy won’t come from politics. It will come from practical engineering, and that would save more lives than any number posted on a roadside sign.

​Speeding, Lifestyle, Speed limit, Autobahn, Highway safety, Driver safety, Align cars 

When Hillary Clinton was asked to sit for a sworn deposition on Wednesday morning as a part of the House’s bipartisan probe into Jeffrey Epstein, she refused to appear. Her husband, former President Bill Clinton, also defied a subpoena to appear before the House Oversight Committee.

Now the House Oversight Committee will begin contempt of Congress proceedings.

“Now on the one hand, it’s rather upsetting to see more Democrats use this situation as just another political pawn. But on the other, Donald Trump has the opportunity to do the funniest thing ever and finally make good on one of his biggest campaign promises,” BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales says.

“And now remember, the Democrats said, ‘Oh, it’s the Republicans who don’t want to investigate. It’s the Republicans who don’t want to release the files.’ Actually it’s the Republicans right here who are trying to investigate. The Republicans run the House,” she continues.

“And Bill and Hillary Clinton right there, kind of key figures in this whole thing. They should probably tell us what they know,” she says, adding, “I mean, hey, Democrats, if we’re serious about getting to the bottom of this, we should hear from those two evil ghouls on the screen, shouldn’t we?”

Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) has announced he will be moving to hold the pair in contempt — but they don’t appear to be willing to go quietly.

“This past year has seen our government engage in unprecedented acts, including against our own citizens. People have been seized by masked federal agents from their homes, their workplaces, and the streets of their communities. Students and scientists with visas permitting them to study and work here have been deported without due process,” a statement from the Clintons began.

“The people who laid siege to the U.S. Capitol have been pardoned and called heroes, agencies vital to the country’s national security have been dismantled,” the statement continued.

Finally after pointing out more grievances they have with the Trump administration, they wrote, “Every person has to decide when they have seen or had enough and are ready to fight for this country, its principles, and its people, no matter the consequences. For us, now is that time.”

“I mean, you just couldn’t make that up if you tried,” Gonzales laughs.

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara’s no-holds-barred takes on news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Sharing, Camera phone, Video, Upload, Video phone, Free, Youtube.com, Sara gonzales unfiltered, Sara gonzales, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Clinton, Bill clinton, Hillary clinton, Jeffrey epstein, The epstein files, James comer, The house oversight committee 

The wife of an NFL legend is looking to unseat a Democrat in a district that has long been controlled by the left-wing party.

The congressional seat, NJ-09, is held by Democrat Nellie Pou, who won by less than 5% of the vote in 2024.

‘Congresswoman Nellie Pou has a charmed life.’

The district has been held by Democrats since the early 1980s, but that is not scaring off Tiffany Burress, a Pittsburgh native. Pittsburgh is also where her husband, former wide receiver Plaxico Burress, spent the first part of his NFL career, playing for the Pittsburgh Steelers.

Plaxico won the Super Bowl with the New York Giants in 2008, beating the undefeated New England Patriots led by Tom Brady, 17-14. The former Michigan State star caught the game-winning touchdown pass from quarterback Eli Manning.

According to the New York Post, Mrs. Burress serves on the Workers’ Comp committee of the New Jersey State Bar association, has been recognized as for her work as an attorney, and is a former college athlete at Penn State.

The seat she hopes to win also includes MetLife/Giants Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey, where the Giants play.

RELATED: Ketanji Brown Jackson still can’t define ‘woman,’ yet rewrites sex law

Photo by Johnny Nunez/WireImage

“Congresswoman Nellie Pou has a charmed life. Fifty years on the government dime, never had a private sector job. In 1997, doors started opening,” Burress said in her campaign ad, which alleged that Pou has been gifted all her government roles.

Burress said that while doors opened for Pou, she herself has “busted through them,” on top of being willing to call out Republicans when they are wrong.

The campaign for Rosie Pino, who is also running as a Republican, told Fox News Digital that Pino is the “only proven winner in this race.”

“Supporting an unknown, untested, out-of-touch candidate who does not reside in the district and changed her party affiliation a few weeks ago just to run for office, would be the political equivalent of shooting ourselves in the leg — dividing the Republican Party and forfeiting the opportunity to hold the critical House Majority,” said Pino spokesman Kennith Gonzalez.

RELATED: Police shoot New Jersey man who allegedly charged them with machete — then find gruesome scene inside his home

Democrat support for the N.J. seat has lessened over the years; Democrats won with 74% of the vote in 2012 and remained around 70% until 2020.

That year, incumbent Democrat Bill Pascrell (now deceased) won with just 65.8% of the vote, and that number dropped to 55% in 2022.

In 2024, Pou won with just 50.8% of the vote; the leading Republican got 45.9%.

At the same time, the district has voted heavily for Democrats in federal elections — until 2024.

In 2008, 2012, 2016, and 2020, at least 59% of voters in NJ-09 chose the Democrat presidential nominee. In 2024 however, Trump won the district 49% to 48%.

As it stands, New Jersey’s state Senate is majority blue, with 25 seats held by Democrats and 15 by Republicans.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​News, Sports, Plaxico burress, Nfl, Football, Democrats, New jersey, Congress, Politics 

Host Nikki Glaser says she wanted to keep her patter mostly nonpolitical at the 83rd Golden Globe Awards on Sunday.

But the comic wasn’t too shy to try out the junked jokes on “The Howard Stern Show” earlier this week.

‘You just don’t say that guy’s name right now.’

On ICE

Reading from her phone, Glaser started with a couple of barbs aimed at Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

“I was going to come in at some point and say, ‘I’m hearing from the bar that we’re out of ice. And you know, we don’t really need ice. And actually, I hate ice.'”

Glaser said the joke was a little too simple and off the mark, though.

“It just felt like, oh, even that’s just being too trivial. … It’s hard to strike the right tone,” she said, according to Variety.

Orange man banned

The 41-year-old also admitted to scrapping an idea Steve Martin sent her about the president renaming the show’s venue to the “Trump Beverly Hilton.”

“You just don’t say that guy’s name right now,” she explained. “I just want to give it space.”

RELATED: Trump-appointed prosecutor who uncovered Somali fraud in Minnesota resigns

Glaser told Stern she’s no longer as precious about cutting material as she used to be.

“You just gotta move on and [say] ‘let’s just write a better joke.'”

Mixed signaling

Many of the celebs in attendance didn’t seem to share Glaser’s determination to keep the proceedings nonpartisan. Some sported pins in protest of ICE with slogans like “Ice Out” and “Be Good.”

The latter is in reference to Renee Good, who was shot and killed by an ICE agent while allegedly attempting to ram him with her car.

The award show host still took jabs at the network airing the ceremonies, mocking CBS for allegedly pulling a story about the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement.

“And the award for most editing goes to CBS News! Yes, CBS News: America’s newest place to see BS news,” Glaser said during the awards.

RELATED: Tom Brady tells Jeff Ross to ‘never say that s*** again’ after a joke about the owner of the New England Patriots

Photo by Rodin Eckenroth/Getty Images

Just kidding

Glaser also shared a few rejected jabs at the A-list nominees, including riffing that “One Battle After Another” star Sean Penn received his nod for “Best Neck Veins.”

She also mocked Penn’s co-star Leonardo DiCaprio for “always squinting.”

“I mean, I assume it’s to read your girlfriend’s ID. Just making sure that the year starts with a two,” she added.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Align, Trump, Ice, Immigration, Minnesota, Awards show, Golden globes, Comedian, Comedy, Entertainment 

The Trump administration revealed that a government contractor leaked information about the military operation in Venezuela earlier this month.

‘There could be some others, and we’ll let you know about that. We’re hot on their trail.’

The Washington Post reported on Wednesday that the FBI searched the home of one of its reporters, claiming the raid was part of an investigation into Aurelio Perez-Lugones.

Perez-Lugones is a Maryland resident who was working as a systems engineer and information technology specialist for a government contracting company when federal authorities arrested him. He has maintained Top Secret security clearance since at least 2000, according to a January 9 affidavit.

Federal prosecutors accused Perez-Lugones of printing screenshots of a Top Secret report, as well as writing classified information on a notepad and taking the sheets of paper home. When authorities searched his home last week, they allegedly found multiple documents that were marked as Secret, including a document found in his lunch box.

The criminal complaint claimed the documents were related to “national defense.” However it did not specify any details, such as whether the information pertained to the United States’ recent operation in Venezuela.

FBI Director Kash Patel shared a statement on Wednesday about the recent arrest of the leaker and that individual’s ties to the Washington Post.

RELATED: ‘Government whisperer’: FBI searches home of WaPo reporter who allegedly obtained classified info from accused leaker

Photographer: Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images

“This morning the @FBI and partners executed a search warrant of an individual at the Washington Post who was found to allegedly be obtaining and reporting classified, sensitive military information from a government contractor — endangering our warfighters and compromising America’s national security,” Patel wrote.

During an interview with Fox News, Attorney General Pam Bondi described the leaker as an IT contractor who had been working with the Department of War and allegedly leaked information related to “a foreign adversary.”

“The great men and women of the FBI executed a search warrant at the direction of Kash Patel and my office on the reporter’s home, seizing the devices that contained classified material regarding our foreign adversaries,” Bondi stated.

RELATED: Online sleuths spot numerous signs that a US strike on Iran is imminent

Attorney General Pam Bondi. Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images

President Donald Trump also addressed news about the alleged leak, describing the suspect as the “leaker on Venezuela.”

“A very bad leaker. So there could be some others, and we’ll let you know about that. We’re hot on their trail,” Trump told reporters at the White House on Wednesday, adding that the alleged leaker would “probably be in jail for a long time.”

Trump officials have confirmed that the suspected leaker is in custody.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​News, Donald trump, Trump, Trump administration, Trump admin, Pam bondi, Kash patel, Fbi, Federal bureau of investigation, Venezuela, National defense, Washington post, Aurelio perez-lugones, Leaker, Politics 

Vice President JD Vance cast the tiebreaking vote in the Senate Wednesday night after some Republicans bucked President Donald Trump on a key war powers resolution.

Vance voted to block a war powers resolution aimed at reining in Trump’s authority to greenlight military operations in Venezuela. The vote was tied at 50-50 after Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Rand Paul of Kentucky, and Susan Collins of Maine defied their party to defy Trump, requiring Vance to break the tie.

‘You know what? That’s good enough for me.’

The resolution ultimately failed in the Senate after Trump and his administration, particularly Secretary of State Marco Rubio, lobbied lawmakers to change their votes.

The war powers resolution was originally advanced last week with the help of Murkowski, Paul, and Collins as well as Republican Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri and Todd Young of Indiana. Both Hawley and Young eventually flipped their votes, allowing Vance to block the resolution altogether.

RELATED: Vance casts tiebreaking vote after Republicans betray Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill

Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images

Hawley explained his initial support for the war powers resolution, saying he was concerned and unclear about the extent of American intervention in Venezuela.

“For me, this has always been about ground troops,” Hawley said in an interview with Fox.

“That’s not something that I think I would want to do.”

“What the secretary of state said to me very clearly is, ‘We’re not doing that,'” Hawley said. “‘We don’t have ground troops in Venezuela. This is not another Iraq. We’re not going to occupy Venezuela.’ And you know what? That’s good enough for me.”

RELATED: Vance casts tiebreaking vote to advance DOGE cuts after Republicans defy Trump

Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

Defectors like Murkowski emphasized their opposition to Nicolas Maduro and his regime but argued that “no meaningful end state has been articulated, and U.S. forces and assets remain fully postured in the region.”

“Even when an action is justified and its outcome welcomed, the Constitution is clear that Congress is a co-equal branch of government with an essential role in decisions that place the United States on a path toward sustained military involvement,” Murkowski said in a statement on X. “Excluding Congress from that process risks eroding public trust and blurring strategic objectives.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Jd vance, Donald trump, Marco rubio, Nicholas maduro, Josh hawley, Todd young, Rand paul, Lisa murkowski, Senate republicans, Senate democrats, War powers, War powers resolution, Venezuela, Politics 

How many years of graduate biology did you need to learn the definition of “woman”? Zero. Children grasp the difference between male and female before they can spell either word. Yet liberal Supreme Court justices and the lawyers who argue before them now treat that distinction as unknowable.

This confusion did not happen by accident. Once a culture rejects God’s creation and natural law, nonsense fills the vacuum.

If you cannot define the subject, you cannot defend it. If you cannot name what a woman is, you cannot decide a case where the law turns on protecting women as a class.

God created the world with real distinctions. Those distinctions do not depend on feelings, desires, or political fashion. When people refuse to think according to what is, scripture describes the result as a “darkened mind,” a mind that cannot grasp even basic truths.

This week, the Supreme Court confronted that reality. The cases before it, arising from West Virginia and Idaho, ask whether biological males who identify as female may compete in women’s sports. The exchanges between the justices and counsel revealed more than legal disagreement. They exposed an unwillingness to define the very terms the law requires.

Several of the court’s conservative justices asked what should have been the most basic question: What does it mean to be a man or a woman?

Justice Samuel Alito pressed an attorney for the ACLU on that point. The attorney conceded that he could not offer a definition of “man” or “woman.” He even admitted his notes warned: “Don’t define sex.” Alito then asked the obvious next question: How can a court determine whether discrimination “on the basis of sex” has occurred if no one will say what “sex” means?

That exchange should have ended the argument.

Congress wrote Title IX in 1972. “Sex” meant biological sex. It did not mean “gender identity,” self-conception, or an internal psychological state. It meant male and female. Everyone understood that because everyone lived in that reality.

Yet one attorney urged the justices to avoid deciding the case on the definition of sex, arguing that Title IX’s purpose was not to define sex accurately but to prevent discrimination. That move should make every American nervous.

Discrimination with respect to what? Opportunities based on what? You cannot prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex while refusing to say what sex is. That is not legal reasoning. That is verbal fog.

RELATED: ‘That would have to apply across the board’: LGBT radicals panic as SCOTUS signals win for girls’ sports

Photo by Oliver Contreras / AFP via Getty Images

Justice Sonia Sotomayor leaned into the confusion by suggesting that excluding a biological male who identifies as female from women’s sports is “by its nature” a sex-based classification requiring heightened scrutiny. Notice what happened. The argument claims no one can define sex, yet it demands courts treat sex as a controlling legal category. A category of what, exactly? The reasoning collapses under its own weight.

This is what a darkened mind looks like in public office. People use words after they drain them of meaning. They demand that others affirm a contradiction and call it clarity.

Human beings have understood the difference between boy and girl across centuries and civilizations. This is not advanced biology. It is ordinary knowledge that undergirds family, language, and society.

So what changed?

The distinction between male and female did not become complicated. It remained simple and permanent. That permanence blocks any ideology that tries to rebuild reality around will and self-definition. God created male and female. No court can repeal creation.

Progressive jurists increasingly treat being “assigned” a sex at birth as oppression. The individual must claim sovereignty over reality. The self becomes god. Identity becomes law.

This worldview also reveals hypocrisy. Liberal justices demand that society submit to one person’s internal feelings about identity, while dismissing the concrete concerns of women who do not want to compete against men in zero-sum athletic contests.

RELATED: Top UK court deals devastating blow to cross-dressing activists

Photo by Oliver Contreras / AFP via Getty Images

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson exposed that contradiction when she questioned why the “fear” of women should govern policy. That question reveals the priority system: One set of feelings can redefine reality and restructure competition; another set — concerns about fairness, safety, and equal opportunity — counts for little.

Justice Jackson famously said she cannot define what a woman is, yet she presents herself as a defender of women’s rights. That contradiction matters. If you cannot define the subject, you cannot defend it. If you cannot name what a woman is, you cannot decide a case where the law turns on protecting women as a class.

Natural law has been pushed aside. The created order is treated as optional. What remains is raw will — whatever a judge, an activist, or an institution demands at the moment. That is not law. It is power dressed up in robes.

The consequences extend beyond sports. Women lose opportunities. Men receive rewards for denying reality. Courts move from recognizing truth to enforcing ideological compliance.

Scripture teaches that “the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Proverbs 9:10). What we witnessed from liberal justices was the opposite: fear of acknowledging God’s created order. When leaders refuse to name basic truths, they do not climb toward enlightenment. They descend into madness.

When justices on the highest court in the land cannot say what a woman is, the problem is no longer sports. The problem is spiritual.

​Opinion & analysis, Supreme court, Title ix, Transgenderism, Boys in girls’ sports, Trans athletes, Equal protection, Definition, Equality, Sports, Gender, Ketanji brown jackson, Samuel alito, Sex, Discrimination, Constitution 

Tensions are rising rapidly in Minneapolis, Minnesota, after yet another ICE-involved shooting.

On Wednesday night, video footage from journalist Nick Sortor went viral, showing one of the latest developments in the conflict.

‘This federal response is growing every day. Send in the MARINES next!’

The video shows federal officers with identification indicating that they are from the Bureau of Prisons, a major development in the federal government’s efforts to control the situation. The prison guards are wearing riot gear and blockading a street to keep a rowdy crowd of rioters from the DHS agents behind them.

Other videos from the area appear to show rioters breaking into police vehicles and stealing police equipment. Some also reportedly threw rocks, ice, and incendiary devices at officers.

RELATED: Trump threatens Insurrection Act after ambushed ICE agent shoots illegal alien: ‘Put an end to the travesty’

Photographer: Victor J. Blue/Bloomberg via Getty Images

“This federal response is growing every day. Send in the MARINES next!” Sortor captioned the BOP video, in part.

Sortor attributed this development to Attorney General Pam Bondi. Blaze News has reached out to the DOJ for comment.

At the end, the video pans around to show a view of dozens of protesters near the line of guards.

One rioter can be heard shouting, “Why the f**k are you here?” and “What more do you f**king want?” before some in the crowd begin chanting, “They’re not qualified!” at the guards.

The video was posted just hours after an ICE agent was “ambushed by three individuals” and was forced to fire a defensive shot at an illegal Venezuelan alien during an attempted arrest, DHS claimed.

The alien suffered a non-life-threatening gunshot wound to the leg and was taken to the hospital, as was the ICE officer.

Trump threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act on Thursday morning given the rising tensions between law enforcement and the increasingly violent rioters.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Politics, Nick sortor, Ice, Dhs, Bureau of prisons, Ice agents, Deportations, Trump, Rioters, Insurrection act 

After a hard-fought battle with cancer, the beloved “Dilbert” creator Scott Adams has passed away — and Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck is devastated.

“We pause for a minute. Not for a punch line,” Glenn begins solemnly.

“We pause for a man who quietly became something far more important than most people ever realized. Scott Adams, for most of his life, was just a cartoonist. As if just a cartoonist is a small thing. He was a cartoonist that connected with us because there was so much wisdom in that little man, that everyman,” he says.

“He was a guy we all loved. After you heard his political views, I’m sure half of the country did not love him. But he became a guiding light for so many people who are just willing to think honestly,” he continues.

“You didn’t have to agree with him. He just asked you to think. He became a mentor in a way to so many people just trying to understand how influence really works. He was a guy who was changing his life, and he would mentor us through our lives by watching how he was dealing with things. He really was a philosopher who was disguised as a stick-figure artist.”

And he was a man who found the courage to convert to Christianity in his final moments.

“You’re going to hear for the first time today that it is my plan to convert. So I still have time, but my understanding is you’re never too late. And on top of that, any skepticism I have about reality would certainly be instantly answered if I wake up in heaven,” Adams said in a video he recorded before his passing.

“And so to my Christian friends, yes, it’s coming. So you don’t need to talk me into it. I am now convinced that the risk-reward is completely smart. If it turns out that there’s nothing there, I’ve lost nothing. But I’ve respected your wishes, and I like doing that. If it turns out there is something there and the Christian model is the closest to it, I win,” he continued.

“So with your permission, I promise you that I will convert,” he added.

“I love that,” Glenn says, “because even there he’s being honest.”

“But while Scott said that lightly, I doubt he took that lightly,” he says. “He was a deep thinker.”

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Free, Sharing, Video phone, Upload, Video, Camera phone, Youtube.com, The glenn beck program, Glenn beck, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze originals, Blaze online, Scott adams, Dilbert, Dilbert cartoon, Philosophy, Christianity, Cancer 

A male is accused of knocking multiple victims amid violent robberies in downtown Chicago last summer.

Michael Seawood, 24, of East Chicago, Indiana, is charged with robbery, aggravated battery causing great bodily harm, and aggravated battery in a public place, CWB Chicago reported.

The victim was struck in the back of the head and knocked to the ground, after which Seawood and his accomplices allegedly took his phone, wallet, and other items, the outlet noted, citing prosecutors.

Seawood and at least one accomplice attacked a 52-year-old around 2:30 a.m. July 6 in the 400 block of North Lower Michigan Avenue, the outlet said, citing prosecutors. During the attack, the victim fell to the ground motionless and suffered a broken jaw that required surgery to have plates installed, the outlet added.

What’s more, a 28-year-old man visiting from Las Vegas tried to intervene in the attack, but prosecutors said Seawood allegedly punched him and knocked him to the ground where he also was motionless, CWB Chicago reported.

While the two victims were incapacitated, Seawood & Co. allegedly went through their pockets and took cash and phones before leaving the area, the outlet said.

On Aug. 1, Seawood and multiple accomplices allegedly attacked a 29-year-old man in the 100 block of East Illinois Street in the Streeterville neighborhood, CWB Chicago said. The victim was struck in the back of the head and knocked to the ground, after which Seawood and his accomplices allegedly took his phone, wallet, and other items, the outlet noted, citing prosecutors.

RELATED: Chicago thug accused of randomly punching mother of 11 in face, knocking her out on downtown street — and White House reacts

Armando L. Sanchez/Chicago Tribune

On Aug. 2, Seawood and two accomplices allegedly attacked and robbed two brothers, ages 19 and 22, near the corner of Michigan Avenue and Lake Street in the Loop, CWB Chicago reported.

The two victims were walking south on Michigan Avenue when Seawood allegedly punched the younger brother in the face, after which the victim fell to the ground and briefly lost consciousness, the outlet said. When he regained consciousness, the victim saw Seawood and two other men going through his pockets and stealing his wallet, the outlet said, citing prosecutors.

The older brother told police one of the attackers hit him and knocked him to the ground as well, but he wasn’t sure which one attacked him, CWB Chicago said. Once the older brother was on the ground, Seawood & Co. allegedly went through his pockets and took his phone, cash, and cards, the outlet added.

Three Chicago police officers subsequently recognized Seawood as one of the violent robbers, prosecutors told CWB Chicago.

Judge John Hock ordered Seawood detained pending trial, CWB Chicago said.

Cook County Jail records indicate Seawood was booked Sunday on no bond; his next court date is Jan. 20.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Physical attacks, Chicago, Arrest, Robberies, Knockouts, Aggravated battery causing great bodily harm, Aggravated battery in a public place, Downtown, The loop, Crime 

By now, you have seen the headlines about Grok creating nonconsensual images of real people and reposting them online for the world to see. You may even have spotted these images in your X feed. Not only is the emergence of this kind of content a problem for the platform, but it’s especially risky when you remember that the fate of the republic rests partly on the shoulders of X and Elon Musk.

The story so far

This is a rapidly developing story, so the details are likely to expand in the coming weeks. So far, this is what we know.

Last week, a barrage of X users were found using Grok to digitally remove the clothing of photos containing real women, often putting them in bikinis or other skimpy outfits. While this is bad enough on its own, some users even targeted minors — including one of the prominent actors in “Stranger Things” — to swap outfits for something inappropriate, and Grok complied.

We have to address how Grok’s behavior could impact X on the world stage.

After plenty of blowback on the web, Elon Musk issued a firm statement, warning, “Anyone using Grok to make illegal content will suffer the same consequences as if they upload illegal content.” The X Safety account later doubled down with the same message, explaining that the platform takes action against CSAM content on X by removing the images, suspending accounts, and even working with local law enforcement as necessary.

That wasn’t enough, however. Although Musk and company scrubbed the social network of the illegal imagery depicting minors, users continued to undress photos of real adult women without discretion. As a result of further inaction, U.S. Democrats asked Apple and Google to remove X from their app stores (though that hasn’t happened yet), the U.K. instated a law that makes it illegal to create nonconsensual intimate images, and Malaysia and Indonesia blocked Grok altogether.

This ultimately prompted Musk to remove Grok’s image creation and editing tool from public access, instead restricting it to paid users, where any illicit activity can be attached directly to users’ accounts and identities.

A self-imposed problem of reckless proportions

The problem of Grok creating nonconsensual images is bad enough on its own. In the United States, we have nonconsensual intimate images laws that prohibit the threat and distribution of private photos and videos. More specifically, the Take It Down Act was designed to protect victims of such content, and posting it on X violates the platform’s user policies.

The worst part is that none of this needed to happen. The fact that Grok can remove the clothes of unconsenting users — adults or otherwise — is an entirely self-made problem that could have been avoided with some proper guardrails. It should not have been an option in the first place, but now that it is, we have to deal with it. Even more important than that, we have to address how Grok’s behavior could impact X on the world stage.

RELATED: Ted Cruz pelted with insane AI memes as X bans unpaid users from editing pics with Grok

Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images

1. One more reason to block free speech

Foreign governments have already been looking for excuses to ban X from their slice of the public square ever since Musk opened the platform to free speech in 2022. This latest stunt is the final reason they need to prove that X is “dangerous” to their people, and places like the U.K., Malaysia, and Indonesia are already moving ahead with laws to restrict or downright ban access. This is bad, of course, because X is one of few online platforms that not only values free speech but encourages it. When users lose access to X, wherever they are, they lose access to the truth.

2. A test of political loyalty

While the governments that already hate Elon Musk are a lost cause, legal missteps with Grok unnecessarily test the loyalty and values of U.S. politicians who are friends with Musk. Lawmakers on the right now have to choose between regulating Grok to protect X users who were harmed by the photos and giving Elon a pass while he self-governs the platform into a better place. Meanwhile, the left will continue to villainize Musk, Grok, and X every chance they get, no matter what happens. It’s a tough position to be in, and it’s a shame that it had to come to this at all.

3. Users lose when Grok goes out of control

The deepfake photo scandal has made users — especially young women — more cautious about posting photos of themselves on the platform. Users shouldn’t have to worry about someone creating and sharing intimate images crafted out of their own content. At the same time, users who flock to X for news, engagement, and information shouldn’t have to dodge these photos as they pop up in their feeds, either. The worst part is that Grok is complicit in the whole thing. At this point, Grok’s behavior is making users leery about coming to X instead of bringing them to the platform, which is the last thing X needs as Threads gains ground.

4. Grok is better bot than this

If nothing else, the images Grok has created are legally dubious, and whether the image creation/editing feature is available to the general public or locked behind a subscription paywall, this isn’t a capability that Grok should have. Other AI platforms, including OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Google Gemini, block this type of content wholesale. Yes, Grok has always valued free speech above the others, and that is great for users, but deepfakes go beyond the First Amendment. It’s simply illegal to create nonconsensual intimate content of real people and share it online. Further, Musk’s AI platform is far too clever and sophisticated to debase itself down to an adult content creation bot, and that bit needs to be removed from Grok’s source code.

We need X more than Grok

X is so much more than the public square. It’s a bastion of free speech where people of all walks of life from around the globe can speak their minds and share ideas that otherwise would go unheard.

Because of X, the truth about so many topics that would otherwise have been relegated to the shadows has been exposed. Just this past week, footage of Renee Good surfaced, showing that she tried to run over the ICE agent who took her life in self-defense. Without X, the leftist media narrative that she was an innocent woman simply driving away from the scene would have permeated the web and we never would have known the truth. Before that, we saw the protests in Iran erupt as its oppressed citizens fought for freedom. And before that, Nick Shirley exposed the multibillion-dollar fraud unraveling in Minnesota over the Somali-run business debacle. And on and on and on.

X is a vital piece of our political landscape, helping the people combat lies, scandals, censorship, and the left (though I repeat myself), and we’ll need X again in the future when the time is right. The platform it has become is far too important to be a test bed for Grok’s edgiest features. The prevalence of the digital public square, the ability to expose corruption, and the sustainability of the republic all hinge on X maintaining its position as a free, open, and truthful platform, and it would be a terrible shame if Grok’s unchecked features got in the way.

​Tech