Zohran Mamdani’s office has made it clear that it’s all about free speech, especially when it comes to the Luigi Mangione fangirl group the “Mangionistas.”

Mamdani’s office granted press passes to Abril Rios, Ashley Rojas, and Lena Weissbrot, who cheered on the alleged murderer outside the courthouse — and had some choice words for UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson.

“His children are better off without him,” one of the Mangionistas said. “They need to learn to not be like their dad.”

“I’m standing on business,” another one said. “F**k Brian Thompson. I don’t give a flying f**k. Millions of Americans suffer every single day.”

“If you guys are OK with someone like Brian Thompson being around and being a part of our society, that says more about you as a person because you look absolutely monstrous defending someone like that,” she added.

“I’m pissed off about this, Dave,” BlazeTV host Stu Burguiere tells co-host Dave Landau on “Stu and Dave Do America.”

“They say they don’t care about this guy dying because they think the children are better off without him,” Stu says.

“Here’s what I don’t get,” Dave chimes in, saying that the “Mangionistas” who “want you to go kill a CEO of a health care company” are the “same people that want you to believe everything that a drug company tells you.”

“Wear a mask and lockstep to every single thing you were told during COVID. So explain that. Like that’s the part I don’t understand. You’re the reason every business shut down, because you believed every single thing that they had to say,” he says.

“But then you’re also on the side of the moron who came from a very, very rich family, and you’re completely OK with that,” he adds.

Want more from Stu and Dave?

To enjoy more of Stu and Dave’s lethal blend of wit, humor, and insightful commentary subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Brian thompson, Luigi mangione, Mangionistas, Stu and dave do america, Zohran mamdani 

Prediction markets have been harshly criticized over claims of insider trading and illegal gambling practices, leading to politicians and media demonizing them wholesale. Are their warnings symptoms of a growing problem in dire need of recourse, or is it all part of a smear campaign meant to wrest political power away from the people? Today, we dispel the myths of these “dangerous” prediction markets, highlight the differences between the top trading apps, and gain some powerful insights from our very own Stu Burguiere.

What is a prediction market?

A prediction market is a system that allows users to trade shares on the outcomes of specific events. In the words of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, “Prediction markets offer a variety of products designed to help the public forecast, plan for, hedge, and even harness perceptions of future events.”

‘When I take a position, I assume I’m going to hold it until resolution.’

Although today’s prediction markets revolve heavily around politics and sports, the first markets centered on something a little less glamorous — agriculture. The Grain Futures Administration of 1922 was a regulatory commission tasked with combating fraud among grain traders. Their efforts were so effective that, by the 1930s, the commission expanded into other products and industries. Under a new name, the Commodity Exchange Administration oversaw markets that regulated cotton, eggs, rice, butter, metals, energy, and more. Finally, in 1974, Congress passed the Commodity Futures Trading Commission Act, which created the Commodity Futures Trading Commission that oversees prediction markets to this day.

The important thing to keep in mind is that prediction markets are nothing new — they’ve been around for a century! However, an increase in online accessibility and notoriety has landed these legal trading platforms in hot water.

Why prediction markets are “dangerous”

If you spend any time online, you’ll see how prediction markets are vilified by everyone from politicians to the media. Most of them claim the same thing — prediction markets are a form of online gambling, a practice that isn’t legal on a federal level. In fact, some states, like Arizona, are suing popular prediction market apps, accusing them of illegal betting practices.

The New York Times even called prediction markets “dangerous,” noting that “prediction machines have become infrastructure for the legitimacy of event outcomes, no matter how outlandish.” In other words, prediction markets have the power to reveal truths and trends outside the media’s control, making them a direct threat to the left-wing media machine.

According to the chairman of the CFTC, Michael S. Selig, prediction markets exist as a way to combat the fake news, stories, and narratives of the media. Instead of relying on talking heads to tell their audience how they should feel about a particular event, users log on to their favorite prediction market app and vote on an event’s outcome based on their own knowledge and deductive reasoning. Since users are discouraged from voting in favor of outcomes they believe to be a lie, prediction markets reveal societal truths backed by real money, giving facts more weight than misinformation with an honesty incentive at the end.

Both left-wing media and politicians, like Arizona’s Democrat Attorney General Kris Mayes, hate prediction markets because they take narrative power away from the elite and put it back into the hands of the people. As for the warnings of illegal gambling? That’s a lie. The CFTC classifies prediction markets as financial products similar to stocks traded on the stock exchange, which are completely legal and regulated by the federal government.

RELATED: Prediction markets let you ‘bet’ in states where gambling is banned: Here’s how

Ethan Miller/Getty Images

Top prediction market apps

Thanks to prediction market apps, the markets themselves are easier to access than ever. Two apps in particular dominate the App Store and Google Play: Polymarket and Kalshi.

Polymarket is a sports-first trading app with robust stats on the MLB, NBA, NHL, golf, and more. It also offers a section for politics and weather, with more categories on the way, but if you’re a sports fanatic, Polymarket is a great place to start.

Kalshi offers a much broader range of trading options. From sports to politics to crypto, culture, and more, Kalshi’s rounded trading portfolio makes trading much more accessible for new and seasoned users who prefer more variety.

Since both apps are financial products, you will need to provide some personal information to create your account — this can include your first and last name, date of birth, phone number, home address, your Social Security number, a form of government ID (either a driver’s license or a passport), and a current selfie for verification.

Remember that prediction markets are subject to the same ethics and government regulations as the stock market. That means all trades are subject to government scrutiny, and insider trading laws do apply.

Make markets ‘Predictable with Stu Burguiere’

To get a better understanding of prediction markets and how they work, we chatted with BlazeTV resident expert Stu Burguiere. Here’s what he had to say:

Q: What are the big differences between the prediction market platforms? Are there any benefits to choosing one platform over another (taking into account the UI, trade options, trading fees, etc.)?

A: I think it’s beneficial for the ecosystem to have many different approaches. Kalshi is the best known in the U.S., they started here as a fully regulated platform in 2021. I was using the platform within their first few weeks of existence, but they didn’t get election markets until 2024 after suing the government and winning.

Polymarket took a more crypto-forward approach and mostly remained overseas in a bit of a gray area for U.S. users. They have since launched Polymarket U.S. but have only recently expanded beyond sports.

PredictIt has been around much longer but was limited in the amount you could invest in any contract until recently. Their fees have been a famous sticking point among the nerd community, of which I am a member.

There are also several other smaller players and rumors of up to a couple of dozen new prediction markets on the way. Some of these will likely partner with deep-pocketed companies and attempt to challenge the big boys.

Q: What are the pros or cons of using multiple prediction market apps?

A: If you’re a serious trader or someone investing a lot of money in this area, it is probably worth being on multiple apps and sites. Even markets with high liquidity will sometimes have differences in price by a few percentage points, and there’s little downside in chasing the best price. You also will find instances where a nearly identical-looking contract has preferable rules on one site over another.

It can get confusing to keep track of everything, but if you’re looking at this as part of a real money portfolio, it’s worth it to look for these advantages.

But for someone just getting started, I wouldn’t sweat it.

Q: Which app provides the best trading data to make a sound decision, set expectations, etc.?

A: I think you can find the information you need to trade pretty easily on most, if not all, of the various markets once you get comfortable. I wouldn’t say any of them are the places where you’re doing research, though. The most important part is to always read the rules because the headline question is occasionally more complicated than you think.

Q: Are there any delays in depositing money to trade or receiving money after a trade is complete?

A: I find it to be about as easy as funding any investment account. Kalshi, for example, offers no-fee bank transfers in one to three days, almost instant crypto transfers, and even Venmo, CashApp, Google Pay, PayPal (fees vary), and traditional bank wire transfer. Maybe even carrier pigeon.

You won’t be surprised to hear they make it very easy for you to deposit your money! But I have also never had an issue at all withdrawing funds from any of them.

If you’ve never dabbled in crypto, the overseas Polymarket exchange can be a little intimidating. The U.S. version seems to be more manageable for the average person.

Q: Are there any missing features between the mobile and desktop web versions of Kalshi and Polymarket?

A: I prefer desktop for anything complicated. It’s pretty easy to make basic trades on the apps or to see how your investments are performing. When you are looking back at your history, you’re going to want the desktop, unless you have a fetish for scrolling and clicking “more” over and over again.

Q: Is there any risk of “wash trading” or manipulation where users can sway the stock in favor of a certain outcome?

A: I don’t think manipulation presents much risk overall, especially with the current market liquidity. There are people much smarter than me trading thousands of times a week, and that’s part of the deal. But that’s not how I go about it. When I take a position, I assume I’m going to hold it until resolution. If you take that approach, it doesn’t really matter where the markets move on a day-to-day basis. In the end, you’re either going to be right or wrong, and no market actor can change that.

Q: How serious are the “illegal gambling” lawsuits, and what are platform holders like Kalshi and Polymarket doing to push back against this narrative?

A: As with any innovation, there are plenty of annoying government officials trying to screw it up. Throw in a hefty dose of established actors looking to protect their turf against competition, and the threat is serious in scope if not in argument.

Luckily, for the time being, we have Michael Selig as CFTC chair, and an administration friendly to financial innovation. Selig has correctly been aggressive in defending the authority of the CFTC to maintain oversight over these markets. Just like your state can’t ban you from buying Walmart stock, they shouldn’t be able to stop you from participating in prediction markets.

This could all change under a different Congress or a President AOC, but we can deal with that level of hell when we arrive in it.

Q: How do prediction markets handle ties? Do these come up often or rarely?

A: I would say a tie is very rare. Most of the rules are written to make them impossible. In the old days, there were sometimes markets with poorly written rules or descriptions that led to controversy. This isn’t particularly common anymore, but it does occasionally happen.

There was a recent example revolving around the removal of the leader of Iran. Kalshi is legally prohibited from listing or paying a contract that is the result of death or assassination. This was clear in the rules, but a lot of people don’t read them. So there was controversy over the required unwinding of that contract, and some overseas markets without those restrictions resolved the contract in a totally different way.

Those rare examples get lots of press but occur in a tiny percentage of the markets available. Most people will never even experience one of them.

Q: Do you have any tips, tricks, or advice for new users who are just starting to get into prediction markets?

A: Start small and assume you’re wrong more often than you think you are. Challenge yourself on your priors, and especially in politics, make sure you’re not investing with your heart. I always feel better investing in a race when I’m on the side of the candidate I want to lose. At the very least, if I’m wrong, I’m happy with the outcome in real life. And if the candidate I dislike winds up winning, at least I’m being paid for my pain. It’s hedging your life.

Oh yeah, and hang out with us at PredictableShow.com.

Tune in

Still curious about prediction markets? Maybe you want to throw some of your own cash on a current event, but you’re not sure how to get started? Check out Stu’s new show — “Predictable with Stu Burguiere” on YouTube and Substack — for the latest prediction market news, updates, insights, and more.

​Tech, Prediction markets, Stu burguiere, Cftc, Polymarket, Kalshi 

When news breaks that foreign aid programs are being paused or restructured, many Christians understandably fear the world’s most vulnerable will be left behind.

It is a fair concern. But it also raises a harder question: What if some of what we have called “help” was not helping in the way we thought?

The recent restructuring of foreign aid creates an opportunity. It allows the United States to reconsider not only how much it gives, but how it gives.

Imposed values

For decades, American foreign assistance has done real good in many places. But too often it has also come with expectations that placed struggling nations in an impossible position. Funding was tied to adopting policies on family life, sexuality, and bioethics that did not reflect the values of the communities receiving that aid. Governments that resisted those conditions risked losing support their people depended on.

From a Christian perspective, that should give us pause. Care for the poor is a moral calling. But care that requires communities to compromise their deepest convictions is not compassion. It is pressure, even if it is delivered in the language of progress.

Scripture calls us to love our neighbor, not to remake our neighbor in our own image.

Pursuing the good

That is why the Geneva Consensus Declaration matters. Today, 41 nations representing more than 2.5 billion people have joined this coalition, affirming that international law does not establish a universal right to abortion and that each country has the authority to determine its own laws on life and family.

These nations were not forced into agreement. Many joined because they were weary of outside institutions attempting to impose agenda-driven frameworks through funding conditions and international pressure. What they were seeking was not isolation, but partnership. They wanted to be treated not as projects to be managed, but as nations capable of shaping their own future.

This reflects a principle Christians should recognize. Human dignity includes moral agency. It includes the freedom of communities to pursue the good, before God, without coercion from more powerful actors.

RELATED: New book from Eric Metaxas shares the American Revolution’s forgotten Christian roots

ericmetaxas.com

The Protego framework

There is also a practical reality the United States cannot ignore. Countries like China are expanding their influence across Africa and Latin America by offering infrastructure and investment with fewer visible conditions. America’s advantage lies in offering something China cannot: genuine partnership that respects the nations it serves.

In practice, that means moving from a model of control to a model of partnership.

At the Institute for Women’s Health, we have sought to do this through what we call the Protego framework. Instead of arriving with predesigned solutions, we work alongside national leaders, faith communities, and local institutions to build programs that reflect the values and needs of each country.

In one African nation, this has meant developing a national framework for health and life-skills education with input from across society, including interfaith leaders. It is designed to reach tens of thousands of educators and health workers. The program belongs to that nation. The values behind it are its own. And when the partnership ends, the capacity to sustain it will remain.

This kind of work is slower. It requires listening, humility, and trust. But it reflects something essential to a Christian understanding of service.

Human flourishing

We are not called simply to deliver outcomes. We are called to serve people as people, not as instruments of our own priorities.

Faithful foreign engagement takes seriously the dignity of every nation and every community. It refuses to make care for the vulnerable conditional on ideological agreement. It invests in what supports human flourishing, strong families, healthy communities, and the well-being of women and children, while ensuring that these efforts are shaped locally rather than imposed from outside.

The recent restructuring of foreign aid creates an opportunity. It allows the United States to reconsider not only how much it gives, but how it gives.

For Christians, the goal should not be to defend every existing program. It should be to ensure that our engagement reflects the character of the One we serve. We are called to help the vulnerable. But faithful service cannot be separated from humility, respect, and truth about the human person.

​Africa, China, Christianity, Christians, Culture, Family life, Geneva consensus declaration, Latin america, Protego framework, Sexuality, Institute for womens health, Pro-life, Abortion, Lgbtq, Faith 

A former Christian school teacher in Indiana has learned her fate after pleading guilty to child sex crimes with a student, according to court records.

Torrie Lemon, 24, pleaded guilty to felony child seduction in Hamilton County last Thursday, according to WTHR-TV.

‘It started with hugs, then longer hugs, then kissing, and then sexual acts.’

Lemon was sentenced to 40 days in prison and nearly four years of probation.

Law enforcement launched an investigation in April 2025.

Lemon — who taught at Colonial Christian School, which includes pre-kindergarten through 12th-grade students and is located on the north side of Indianapolis — was accused of having sex with a student while she was a chaperone on a school trip to South Carolina.

Citing court documents, WXIN-TV said a friend of the victim reportedly borrowed the victim’s phone and found sexual text messages between Lemon and the victim — and the friend told a teacher.

The IndyStar obtained court documents saying a student informed a teacher after finding a video on the victim’s phone of Lemon and the victim kissing.

Court docs said the teacher confiscated the student’s phone, informed the victim’s parents, and filed a report with the Indiana Department of Child Services as well as with police in South Carolina.

The victim told an officer with the Greenville Police Department that she was “in a relationship” with Lemon, according to court documents.

Lemon informed a Greenville officer that she “was having an inappropriate relationship with a student from her school” for a few months, court records stated.

Court documents added that school officials immediately sent Lemon home from the South Carolina trip, and the parents of the victim picked up the victim.

RELATED: Former girls’ high school basketball coach hit with 32 sex charges, including ‘deviant sexual intercourse with a student’

On April 14, a detective with the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department interviewed the victim.

The student said she started texting and hanging out with Lemon in January 2025 as friends, but the messages “quickly began turning sexual,” WXIN reported.

The student told police she never intended their relationship to turn sexual since “she knew it was wrong,” but the pair did have sexual relations in March 2025, according to court documents the IndyStar obtained.

The IndyStar reported that the detective also learned that the two “had sex at Lemon’s on-campus apartment, in a church, and at the student’s house.”

The student’s mother told a detective she considered Lemon a “family friend,” and the family allowed Lemon to stay at their house on several occasions after she moved to Indiana from New Hampshire, according to court records.

Court documents also indicated that the student’s father said his daughter began talking about age of consent laws in Indiana after the two met.

‘I love you more than I can describe.’

The mother told authorities that her daughter and Lemon “quickly” developed a friendship over a few months, court documents stated.

Court records also show that the mother discovered text messages between Lemon and her daughter that read “I can’t wait to see you,” and “I saw you across the room and wanted to give you a hug.”

According to court documents, the mother confronted Lemon, who told the mother nothing inappropriate was happening.

The mother was “upset” after sexual misconduct accusations surfaced, court docs said.

Court records also said detectives examined the daughter’s cell phone for evidence, but most of the text messages between the student and teacher had been permanently deleted.

The digital forensics unit of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department could not recover most of the deleted data from the student’s phone, but the unit did recover some communications between the pair, according to court documents.

The IndyStar reported that some of the messages read, “Thank you for an amazing night and morning,” and “I love you more than I can describe.”

RELATED: Teacher allegedly sexually abused 5th-grade boy in classroom closet, kissed him in front of her own young child in classroom

Lemon was fired from her teaching position in June 2025, WXIN reported.

In Lemon’s exit interview with the school’s principal, she confessed to having an inappropriate relationship with a student and said that “it started with hugs, then longer hugs, then kissing, and then sexual acts,” according to the IndyStar.

WXIN reported that the victim said they “started out as just friends,” but that she and Lemon “began making sexual jokes and talking about attraction to women.”

Court docs say the victim told investigators that she and Lemon “wanted it to just be a friendship” because they knew a sexual relationship “went against their beliefs as Christians, and it was also against the law.”

According to court documents, the 17-year-old girl told police that Lemon kissed her during a school trip to Wabash, Indiana.

WXIN reported:

The victim then said she and Lemon began touching each other sexually while hanging out in March at her parents’ house. This reportedly escalated, with the victim regularly visiting Lemon’s apartment — located on Colonial Christian School grounds — to have sex.

Lemon was arrested in Hamilton County in June 2025 and pleaded guilty to felony child seduction.

Lemon also was hit with two additional counts of child seduction tied to the same investigation in Marion County, according to WXIN.

WXIN reported that Lemon was booked into Marion County Jail on Nov. 9, 2025, and released the same day after posting a $15,000 surety bond.

Lemon is set to appear Friday in a Marion County court where she is set to be sentenced after a change of plea hearing, WXIN added.

Neither the Marion County Prosecutor’s Office, the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department, nor Colonial Christian School immediately responded to Blaze News‘ requests for comment.

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

​Torrie lemon, Child sex abuse, Crime, Indiana, Christian school, Teacher 

David McGuinty, Canada’s liberal defense minister, boasted late last month that the DEI-ed Canadian military had surpassed its regular force recruiting target for the second consecutive year, enrolling 7,310 new members in fiscal year 2025-26. That brings the total of full-time military members to 67,827. Another 25,054 souls are in the reserves.

“The Canadian Armed Forces’ continued recruiting success signals more than progress — it reflects a renewed strength at the core of our military,” said McGuinty.

‘I think we are representative of the Canadian demographic.’

What McGuinty neglected to mention in his optimistic press release was that nearly 20% of these recruits aren’t actually Canadians, thanks to a 2022 decision by then-Trudeau Defense Minister Anita Anand — the daughter of Indian migrants — to drop the military’s citizenship requirement.

It has become abundantly clear that having multitudes of permanent residents from the third world join up in exchange for expedited naturalization isn’t so much a value added as a massive liability.

A damning and confidential Canadian Forces Leadership and Recruit School report that was authored by Lieutenant-Colonel Marc Kieley and obtained both by Juno News and the National Post highlights some of the various problems foreign recruits have created for the military.

RELATED: US calls Canada’s bluff on defense spending; ‘pauses’ 86-year-old alliance

Creative Touch Imaging Ltd./NurPhoto/Getty Images

The report, which was also leaked online, notes that in Quebec’s first noncitizen Francophone platoon, only 48% managed to graduate and there were constant ethnic clashes, specifically between the Cameroonian and Ivory Coast candidates.

More generally, noncitizen recruits in the Canadian military — some of whom had been in the country for only three months — have demonstrated a profound lack of “respect toward women” superiors and peers.

“For many candidates, it is the first time they have lived with members of a different sex, and for some it is also the first time they have been expected to treat women as their peers,” said the report. “Platoons are also reporting inter-candidate cultural frustrations, with lack of respect towards women being the most common concern.”

Some foreigners apparently also have issues taking orders from younger superiors.

“Older candidates from certain cultural backgrounds are also more likely to experience friction when responding to younger CFLRS instructors due to cultural hierarchies based on age,” said the confidential report.

In addition to a failure of baseline competency, ethnic infighting, communication issues, and a rampant disrespect for women and junior officers, foreigners also have unrealistic expectations going into their training.

The report noted, for instance, that a “surprising number of permanent resident candidates believed they would simply go home after basic training” and that foreigners in officer training “are more likely to imagine a CAF officer position as a public service job, rather than a military occupation.”

Physical fitness is also an issue for those recruits McGuinty is hoping will renew the Canadian military’s strength. Permanent residents failed the initial basic training fitness screening test last year at a rate of 14.79% compared to 7.89% for citizens within the same period.

There has been some internal pushback.

According to the report, “On French (officer) platoons, where permanent residents have made up 50%-80% of all candidates, there have been more emotional responses, with Francophone staff openly raising the question of whether it is appropriate for officer commissions to be granted to non-Canadian citizens.”

Commodore Pascal Belhumeur, a spokesman for the Canadian Department of National Defense, told the National Post, “I think the Canadian Armed Forces that we are recruiting is a representation of Canadian society now.”

According to Statistics Canada, 23% of the persons presently in Canada are immigrants.

“If you look at the number of Canadians that are foreign-born and the number of people who we’re bringing into the Canadian Armed Forces, I think we are representative of the Canadian demographic,” said Belhumeur, adding that the military is “proud to reflect the diversity of Canadian society.”

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

​Canada, Canadian, Dei, Diversity, Foreigners, Immigrants, Military, Recruitment, Woke, Politics 

Perhaps the most outspoken supporter of President Donald Trump and the MAGA movement in San Diego was seriously injured after what the California Post called a “brutal attack” outside the man’s infamous “Trump House.”

Around 2:15 p.m. on Wednesday, Escondido police arrived on the scene to find a man with severe injuries lying on the ground while a utility worker reportedly restrained another individual.

‘Whenever I went to visit, I made sure to swing by that place and shout stuff at them.’

The injured man was rushed to a nearby trauma center in what is believed to be critical condition. The Post did not identify the injured victim but indicated he is the owner of the “Trump House” on Buchanan Street and that he is “fighting for his life.”

According to the Post, blood could be seen dripping from the curb near the home, and one suspect was arrested.

Escondido Police Department Lt. Robert Craig confirmed that the department had responded to a report of an assault, that one suspect is in custody, and that the “investigation is still ongoing,” the San Diego Union-Tribune reported.

RELATED: Judge APOLOGIZES to suspected would-be Trump assassin — and compares him to Jan. 6 defendants

For years, the notorious Escondido residence has been covered with pro-Trump, pro-MAGA, and pro-America paraphernalia, including flags, signs, and red, white, and blue colors, an ostentatious political display that has generated feelings of animosity among other residents.

According to the Post, one online commenter said of the “Trump House,” “My buddy lived down the street from him. Whenever I went to visit, I made sure to swing by that place and shout stuff at them.”

Another called for the owner to be reported to authorities for allegedly violating state election laws. “Any neighbor can complain to the city. No campaign flags or signs are allowed more than 90 days from an election,” the person said. “California state law. Please file a complaint. The more the better.”

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

​California, Donald trump, Maga, Politics 

Can populism and optimism mix? These days, the contentious AI debate is fueling the false impression that the answer is no. But recent polling convincingly shows that there’s one important tech issue on which an overwhelming majority of Americans support an empowering, freedom-enhancing change: unlocking mobile phones.

In comparison to the titanic struggle over things like data centers, the simple act of requiring providers to let consumers take their cell phones with them — without penalties or fees — might, at first glance, seem like small ball. Take a moment to look at the numbers, however, and the truth is revealed.

In the shorter term, unlocking the nation’s phones unlocks potentially life-changing savings for most Americans. In the longer term, the move helps establish a crucial baseline for applying pro-freedom, pro-ownership device policy to the myriad next-gen devices — even more powerful than smartphones — soon to fill up our everyday lives.

The momentum for change isn’t confined to consumers crying out for relief.

Start with the polls. A startling nine in 10 consumers, regardless of partisan affiliation, support the right to take their phones with them when changing service producers. But the real stunner is why.

More than a mere preference (who wouldn’t default toward more choice?), consumers are highlighting a hidden pain point that hasn’t seemed to catch the eye of analysts without much to worry about at the kitchen table. Phone locking doesn’t just block customers — and today, who isn’t a smartphone customer? — from taking their phones with them. It blocks them from shopping freely for better, more affordable deals.

We’re not talking couch-change savings here. Switching plans can save thousands. In a household with just two phone lines, a savvy switch cashes out to as much as $1,200 per year, according to the Internet and Television Association.

And for most families, of course, two smartphones are table stakes. A Consumer Affairs report shows the typical household has an average of around 20 connected devices. Almost all children receive their own phones by age 15. Most Americans ages 18 to 29 live in a household with three or more phones. Consumer research from WhistleOut concludes a truer estimate of household cost savings from unlocking consumer phones is closer to $2,000 a year — and as high as $2,200.

Saving enough to save a life

Let’s pause to emphasize what that means in real-world terms. For average American households, $2,000 represents 2.5% of their annual budget — fully one-third of their monthly budget, roughly equal to their entire average housing cost per month. Meanwhile, fewer than half of U.S. households have the cash or savings to cover a $2,000 emergency expense, according to household economics and decision-making data from the Federal Reserve.

The savings unlocked by the simple regulatory act of unlocking smartphones aren’t chump change. They’re enough to change lives — or save them.

And it doesn’t stop there. Locked phones are a rip-off when it comes to resale value, dinging sellers 20% to 40% of their value compared to the same phone unlocked. That’s around $125 to $150 in lost value for the seller of a locked iPhone likely to sell today. If the seller can’t unlock the phone, he’ll have to consider buying a new one earlier than desired, adding hundreds more to costs.

Calculating conservatively, the total cost phone locking imposed on American households pencils out to around $2,400 or higher — more than they pay monthly on average for housing and over twice their monthly outlay on transportation, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics surveys.

RELATED: Social media scams are up 700%. Here’s how to stay safe.

Media Trading Ltd/Getty Images

Not a pretty picture. And little excuse. The good news is that the momentum for change isn’t confined to consumers crying out for relief. Led by Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), key senators are throwing their political weight behind the idea and asking the FCC to unlock our phones.

Although phone lock reform has been held back in the past by valid fraud concerns, as Lummis and her co-signers write in a recent letter to FCC Chairman Brendan Carr, they’re “confident … that the Commission will be able to appropriately balance those concerns by adopting a reasonable waiting period — e.g., 180 days – before a device must be unlocked. Such a period addresses concerns of fraud while still achieving the important objectives that unlocking delivers, including expanding consumer choice, preserving competition, and improving affordability.”

All in all, it’s a slam-dunk policy shift — the kind of low-hanging fruit that easily delivers outsized and long-overdue relief for millions.

Today our phones, tomorrow our bots?

But to bring us back to the bigger picture of transformative technological change in America, unlock reform is more than a one-and-done change. It’s a crucial marker laid down just in time to help set the tone for a freedom-forward, pro-ownership approach to the next-gen devices about to proliferate across American business and private life — drones, robots, the works. In all likelihood, these devices will fall under the purview of the Federal Trade Commission, not the FCC, but, taken together, the principled logic behind mobile unlocking and the FTC’s work preventing smart-home device bricking and forced ecosystem lock-in shows a clear and powerful synergy. Together, the commissions can and should advance a strategic populist policy of ensuring that producers’ software restrictions don’t limit consumers’ physical ownership rights.

At this critical juncture, unlocking the phones is the next step in tech policymaking that preserves American rights while saving Americans money. What could be more American than that?

​Opinion & analysis, Mobile phone, Fcc, Ftc, Populism, Artificial intelligence, Ownership, Cynthia lummis, Regulation 

A few years ago, journalist Ezra Levant received the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee Medal for defending freedom of expression after refusing to “bend the knee” and publishing Danish cartoons of Muhammad.

Now, the prime minister of the United Kingdom has banned him from the country.

“To have the prime minister of the United Kingdom ban me, a journalist … I’ve never done anything illegal in my life. I’ve never even had a parking ticket in the U.K. When I go there, it’s to do journalism,” Levant tells Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck.

“Glenn, your radio and you would be shut down within a week; I’m sorry to say it,” he continues. “Your First Amendment in America is more important than almost anything else, because with that, you can fight for all your other freedoms. Never give up your First Amendment.”

While everyone assumes other Western countries have the same First Amendment rights, Levant explains that they’re different.

“In the United Kingdom, according to the Times of London, a very prestigious newspaper, on any given day, on average, 30 people are arrested for what they post on social media. 30 a day. I’m not a fan of Russia, but even they don’t arrest 30 people a day for word crimes,” Levant says.

And the government doesn’t go after those who are actually harming others.

“They’re targeting people who criticize the government, especially on the issue of mass immigration. And the number-one thing that they’re scared about talking about is the rape gangs of largely Pakistani Muslim men targeting white girls,” Levant explains.

“When people have a march or a rally against these rapes, the government goes into freakout mode because it challenges the entire multiculturalism and immigration structure of the U.K.,” he says.

“So,” he continues, “never give up your free speech, Glenn, because you can see it in real time in the U.K.”

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.

​Blaze media, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blazetv, Conservative, Ezra levant, First amendment, Free speech, Glenn beck, Globalist agenda, Government, Journalism, Mass immigration, Muhammad, Prime minister, Russia, Social media, The glenn beck program, Times of london, United kingdom 

The Pentagon appears to be sending Ottawa a message: Rhetoric is no substitute for military capability.

The Department of Defense announced Monday it was “pausing” the 86-year-old Permanent Joint Board on Defense between the United States and Canada, according to Undersecretary of War for Policy Elbridge Colby. The move comes amid mounting frustration in Washington over Canada’s chronic defense underinvestment — and Prime Minister Mark Carney’s increasingly confrontational rhetoric toward President Donald Trump.

‘We can no longer avoid the gaps between rhetoric and reality. Real powers must sustain our shared defense and security responsibilities.’

Established in 1940 by President Franklin Roosevelt and Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King, the board became one of the earliest pillars of continental defense cooperation. Coming as Nazi Germany tightened its grip on Europe and fears grew over Atlantic security, the agreement reflected Roosevelt’s recognition that American and Canadian security could no longer be treated separately.

That alliance eventually evolved into NORAD and decades of deep military integration between the two countries.

All talk

Now Washington appears to be signaling that the relationship cannot continue on autopilot.

“We can no longer avoid the gaps between rhetoric and reality,” Colby wrote on X. “Real powers must sustain our rhetoric with shared defense and security responsibilities.”

Colby argued that while a militarily capable Canada benefits the United States, Ottawa has repeatedly failed to meet its defense commitments in a credible way.

The timing is awkward for Carney, whose government has loudly projected Canadian independence from Washington while remaining vague about how it intends to rebuild the country’s depleted armed forces.

RELATED: ‘AMERICAN INVASION’: Flailing Canada PM Mark Carney invokes historical grudge in latest lob at Trump

George Rose/Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

Jet blues

Although Ottawa recently claimed the government had finally reached NATO’s benchmark of spending 2% of GDP on defense, critics have questioned how the government arrived at that number. Media reports have indicated that the Liberals counted items such as landscaping at military bases and civilian airport infrastructure upgrades as defense expenditures.

More tellingly, Carney’s April 28 Spring Economic Statement reportedly contained little detail on major procurement priorities.

That uncertainty now extends to Canada’s planned purchase of 88 Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter jets. Despite years of delays and political debate, the Carney government is still reviewing the order, with Defense Minister David McGuinty recently confirming that alternatives remain under consideration.

One possibility floated by Ottawa is a mixed fleet pairing the American-made F-35 with Sweden’s Saab Gripen fighter. But U.S. Ambassador to Canada Pete Hoekstra has repeatedly warned that Canada’s role in NORAD could be jeopardized if Ottawa fails to follow through on the full F-35 purchase.

Buy or beware

The concern is not merely political but operational. Every branch of the U.S. military that flies fighter aircraft is transitioning to the F-35 platform, which is also used by several of Canada’s closest defense partners, including the British Royal Air Force and the Royal Australian Air Force. Hoekstra has argued that the Gripen would create interoperability problems inside a continental defense structure increasingly built around the F-35 ecosystem.

For Washington, the frustration is becoming increasingly obvious: Canada wants the diplomatic stature and moral authority of a serious middle power while continuing to hesitate on the military commitments required to sustain that role.

The Pentagon’s decision to pause the defense board may ultimately prove symbolic. But symbols matter in alliances — especially when they come from Washington.

After decades of assuming continental defense cooperation was automatic, the United States now appears willing to publicly question whether Canada is prepared to carry its share of the burden.

​Defense department, Canada, Culture, Donald trump, F35 fighter jets, Franklin roosevelt, Lockheed martin, Mark carney, Norad, Pentagon, Pete hoekstra, William lyon mackenzie king, Letter from canada