She was 78 years old, and her husband had dropped dead in the living room the day before she called me. Mrs. Schultz was trying to come to grips with reality; her husband’s death wasn’t yet fully real to her even though she was planning his funeral.

“We moved down here to Florida last year after talking about doing it for decades,” she said in her Bronx accent. “I think Martin was surprised to die so suddenly.”

The price for the same burial service, all in one town, can vary by 200% to 300%, depending on which funeral home you choose.

We both waited a beat and then shared a chuckle. Laughter and tears go together.

Death and taxes

It was Mrs. Schultz who was surprised and grieving and a little lost. She called me for help planning her husband’s funeral. At the time, I was the director of a nonprofit consumer group dedicated to helping grieving people plan funerals that were both meaningful and affordable. Americans spend more than $20 billion a year to bury or cremate our dead, and a single full-service funeral can easily run $10,000 or more.

But it doesn’t have to cost that much, and it doesn’t have to be the frightening and mysterious transaction that funeral planning has become for so many Americans.

Readers, I want to have a family talk with you. If you’re middle-aged, grab your mom and dad. If you’re elderly, grab your mid-life children. This is the conversation I know that none of you want to have, but I promise that you’ll find yourself feeling relieved when we’re done.

The death of a loved one is the most stressful event that will happen in your life. There’s no reason for the funeral planning to add to the grief. The unknown is what scares us the most, so let’s take the mystery out of it. I’m going to give you an overview of the most typical funeral, burial, and cremation options and how to avoid overspending in a time of grief.

Mortuary mythology

Mortuary mythology: that’s what I call the set of beliefs most adult Americans hold about death, dying, and funerals. Having spoken to tens of thousands of grieving people over the years, I’ve learned that almost everything we think we know about the process is wrong. And it’s wrong in a way that can cost you money you don’t need to spend.

Very few things are required by law when it comes to burying the dead. In every U.S. state, the only legal requirements are for a physician or coroner to certify the death and file a death certificate, for certain paperwork like burial or cremation permits to be filed, and that the body be buried, cremated, or donated to anatomical science.

Really. That’s it. Everything else is your choice. And that includes whether or not to embalm or use a casket.

Embalming is extra

No law in any U.S. state requires embalming simply because someone has died. You do not need to embalm the body to bury it — or even to view it.

Some states do require some kind of preservation if a body is not buried or cremated within 24 hours of death, but embalming (with a price tag of $600 or more) is not the only option; refrigeration can be far more economical.

One other note: Don’t let anyone tell you embalming is necessary to “prevent disease”; contrary to popular misconceptions, dead bodies are not a source of disease transmission.

No casket, no problem

Caskets are not required by law. No law in any state requires a coffin as a condition of burial. Most cemeteries will require them, but so-called “green cemeteries” bar them and prefer old-time burial in just a shroud.

No special casket, even if it’s marketed as “sealed” or “protective” will prevent the body from decomposing. None of them will keep air, water, or earth out.

Neither will any vault or outer burial container (a box for the box that most cemeteries require in order to keep the cemetery level when heavy mowing equipment is used that could crush the casket). Spending extra on a “sealed” box is just throwing cash into a hole in the ground.

Know your options

You can arrange a funeral, burial, cremation, or a memorial service, in almost any combination. Or you can have no ceremony at all and opt for a “direct” cremation or burial. You may also donate a loved one’s body to a medical school.

There are some “new” ways of doing these things you may have heard about, but they’re merely variations on the same basics.

Green or “natural” cemeteries prohibit embalming and metal caskets, preferring to bury the dead naturally as our ancestors did before the late 19th century, with an eye to conserving the land.

You may have heard of “water cremation,” sometimes referred to by brand names such as “Aquamation.” This is the process of using a base (the opposite of an acid) to quickly reduce the body to liquid. Just like with flame cremation, you get the “cremated remains,” the sand-like bone fragments, returned at the end of the process.

Your rights under the ‘Funeral Rule’

Your best protection as a funeral services consumer is something called the “Funeral Rule.” This is a regulation from the Federal Trade Commission that gives you, the customer, the following rights.

By law, funeral homes must:

Give you price quotes by phone on request;Hand you a printed, itemized price list, just like a menu at a restaurant, when you meet with a funeral director to make arrangements; andEnsure that the price list allows you to choose “a la carte.” Funeral homes may offer you all-inclusive packages, but they may not require you to buy a package.

The Funeral Rule does not yet require funeral homes to put their price lists online, but consumer advocates hope that will change soon.

Why does the Funeral Rule matter to you? Because of the shocking variation in price between funeral homes for essentially the same service.

Shopping around

You’re used to finding modest price variations on new cars or new phones depending on the vendor. But we’re not talking about that. The price for the same burial service, all in one town, can vary by 200% to 300%, depending on which funeral home you choose.

Let’s look at a real-world example. The nonprofit Funeral Consumers Alliance (I used to direct the organization) is a network of volunteer organizations that does cost-comparison surveys of funeral and cremation prices to make shopping around easier for you.

We’ll use the latest price survey from the Funeral Consumers Alliance of Western Massachusetts as an example.

Suppose we live in the region and are looking for what’s called “direct cremation” and “immediate burial.” Direct cremation is the simplest, least expensive service. There’s no embalming, no casket, and no ceremony. It’s just the retrieval of the body from the place of death, the paperwork, the cremation, and the return of the remains to the family.

A reasonable price for this service is somewhere around $1,200, give or take, and depending on your area of the country. Immediate burial is the same simple service, it just ends at the cemetery instead of the crematory (but remember, cemetery costs are extra).

Consider the incredible price spread for this one service in one region: Depending on which local funeral home you use, you’ll be charged anywhere from $1,600 to $5,275.

This is why shopping around ahead of time when you are not under pressure is the most effective way to control funeral costs. Most families simply use the same funeral home generation after generation without ever comparing services and costs. As a result, many overpay, whether they’re looking for something simple or a more involved funeral.

Your turn

Anne called Funeral Consumers Alliance about seven years ago. Her mother had died, and she didn’t know what to do. The only thing her mother had said about her last wishes was, “I want to be buried next to your father, everything else is up to you.”

But in the intervening years, mom had moved to Wyoming, while Anne lived in Alabama. Dad was buried at the old church cemetery in Maine. The cost of having her mother’s body prepared and flown across the country for a distant burial was not something Anne could afford without jeopardizing her kids’ tuition and the mortgage.

Anne was crying with worry that she was letting her mother down. I suggested that, if her mother could be there now, she probably would not say “Yes, Anne, I want you to skip paying the mortgage and pull my grandkids out of school so that you can afford something expensive and complicated for my dead body.”

The relief was immediate. “You’re right,” Anne said, “My mother wouldn’t want this. She’d understand.”

My friend Michael’s father, Irving, paid for his funeral ahead of time (not usually a good idea). Irving sealed up the paperwork in an envelope labeled, “To my son Michael only to be opened AT MY DEATH.”

I begged Michael to disobey his father and open that envelope early. I knew that his father believed they paid for everything but that Michael would find out otherwise when death came. Michael refused.

Then, his father died. As I feared, there were thousands of dollars in unwelcome and unexpected cemetery fees that could not have been prepaid. This made his father’s death much more difficult for Michael.

I relate these stories in hopes of convincing you to have an open, candid family discussion about funeral planning now, while everyone is still alive. It’s not morbid or weird; it’s loving.

We are all going to die, and we will all leave behind people who miss us and mourn us. Death should be a time for families to come together in grief and remembrance. We don’t have to add financial stress to emotional pain.

​Josh slocum, Lifestyle, Death, Funeral industry, Consumer protection, Cremation, Embalming, Casket, Deathstyle 

Anti-natalist propaganda is in full swing as usual, as the wildly popular “Call Her Daddy” podcast recently featured singer Chappell Roan telling host Alex Cooper that no one she knows with children is happy.

“All of my friends who have kids are in hell. I don’t know anyone, I actually don’t know anyone who’s happy and has children at this age,” Roan explained. “I literally have not met anyone who’s happy, anyone who has like light in their eyes, anyone who has slept. All of my friends who have kids are in hell.”

Liz Wheeler of “The Liz Wheeler Show,” who is wife and a mother herself, couldn’t disagree more.

“Sounds like your friends suck. Sounds like you need new friends if all your friends who have kids are in hell. This is a feminist narrative, and it’s also just not true,” Wheeler says, before pulling out the receipts to prove it.

In a General Social Survey from 2022, the happiest women in the United States were married women with children — and it’s not even close.

39.5% of married women with children reported being “very happy,” while 47.6% of married women with children reported being “pretty happy.” Only 12.9% of married women with children reported being “not too happy.”

Only 21.5% of unmarried women with no children reported being “very happy,” while nearly twice as many unmarried women with no children reported being “not too happy” at 24.6%.

Wheeler believes that Roan’s own anecdotal account may have a lot more to do with the kinds of lifestyles her friends are more likely to be living.

“If her friends are trying to live a selfish lifestyle, if they are trying to drink a lot, and do drugs, and go out to the bars at night, and their children are inconvenient to their hedonistic lifestyle, then yeah, they might not be happy with children,” Wheeler says.

“Or if they are allowing their children to be undisciplined, and if they are feeding their children garbage food that poisons their brain and over-vaccinating them and giving them too much technology and they’re out of control, yeah, maybe they’re annoying, but all of this comes back to the parent, not the child,” she adds.

Want more from Liz Wheeler?

To enjoy more of Liz’s based commentary, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Video, Upload, Free, Camera phone, Video phone, Sharing, Youtube.com, The liz wheeler show, Liz wheeler, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Anti natalist propaganda, Motherhood, Pro natalist, Chappell roan, Call her daddy, Alex cooper, Leftist propaganda, Feminist propaganda 

As families faced a 20% spike in inflation under President Joe Biden, it’s no surprise that a strong majority of voters oppose new tax increases.

According to new polling from the Independent Women’s Forum, 79% of likely voters in the 2026 midterm elections support extending the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. That includes 80% of seniors, 78% of women, and 78% of independent voters.

The American people desire a simpler, fairer tax system.

Across all demographics, women voiced strong support for keeping the tax cuts in place. A majority agreed that Congress should act to stop individual income tax rates from rising in January 2026.

While inflation has begun to fall under President Trump, including last month’s slowest core inflation rate in nearly four years, more action is needed to keep prices moving downward.

Two-thirds of voters agree that now is not the time to raise taxes. That includes 65% of women and 70% of voters ages 18 to 34, who say high prices and high interest rates make additional tax increases unacceptable.

Tax cuts boosted incomes

The results speak for themselves. By 2019, median household income reached a record high of $68,703. That same year, 4.2 million Americans — many in female-headed households — rose out of poverty, bringing the national poverty rate to a record low.

A major factor was the drop in the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%. Workers, who often shoulder the burden of corporate taxes, saw immediate gains. In response to the rate cut, many companies invested directly in their employees by raising wages, issuing bonuses, expanding benefits, funding job training programs, and creating new positions.

These changes suggest the tax law not only supported American families but also helped drive job growth and a stronger economy.

George Mason University economist Tyler Cowen reported in July — more than six years after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act took effect — that as a result of the law, “Total tangible corporate investment went up by about 11%” and “there has been a long-run increase in GDP of 0.9% — a substantial sum in an economy of more than $27 trillion.”

Small businesses thrive

Small businesses are the backbone of the U.S. economy. These “pass-through” businesses — such as sole proprietorships, partnerships, and S-corporations — are taxed at individual income tax rates. They employ nearly half of the American workforce and represent almost 44% of America’s gross domestic product.

Before the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, some small businesses filing under the individual income tax code faced tax rates as high as 39.6%. Less than a year after the law’s enactment, the National Federation of Independent Business’s small-business optimism index hit the highest level ever recorded during its 45-year history. The previous record was set during Ronald Reagan’s tenure.

Now, small businesses face a looming challenge: The 20% small business deduction expires at the end of this year, which could significantly increase their tax burden. This deduction was designed to ease tax burdens on small and midsized businesses just as C-corporations benefited from the corporate tax rate cut.

Tax cuts help people and small businesses. As demonstrated after the 2017 tax cuts, extending them will ease inflationary pressures by lowering business costs, raising wages, and strengthening workers’ ability to withstand economic shocks.

The voters have spoken

Our polling found 59% of likely voters — including 77% of Trump voters — agree that “The 2017 tax cuts contributed to lower prices for shoppers before inflation kicked up in 2021.” This view resonated with young voters particularly, with 64% of likely voters ages 18 to 34 in agreement. This sentiment may explain the notable shift among younger voters toward Trump during the 2024 presidential election.

The American people desire a simpler, fairer tax system, and enacting sensible reforms, extensions, and updates to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act will do just that.

The timing, public sentiment, data, and legal pathway are aligned. It’s time for Congress to pass additional tax reforms for America.

​Tax cuts and jobs act, Donald trump, Taxes, Expiration, Congress, Small businesses, Families, Income, Poverty, Economic growth, Prosperity, Opinion & analysis 

Another judge has stepped in to temporarily block the Trump administration — this time related to $11 billion in public health grants left over from the coronavirus pandemic.

The U.S. Health and Human Services Department argued in favor of the cuts, saying that the programs were no longer necessary since the pandemic had officially ended. The lawsuit was filed by 23 states and the District of Columbia to keep the money spigot open.

‘I’ll keep standing up to defend Pennsylvania taxpayers, permanently reverse these unlawful cuts, and hold the federal government to the commitments it has made to our Commonwealth.’

U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy in Rhode Island said the funds should be maintained until the court could make a full ruling on the case.

“They make a case, a strong case, for the fact that they will succeed on the merits, so I’m going to grant the temporary restraining order,” she said.

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, a Democrat, praised the ruling that preserved federal funds flowing to the state.

“We just won in court to stop the Trump Administration’s illegal cuts of more than half a billion dollars in public health grants owed to Pennsylvania,” wrote Shapiro.

“These dollars have been committed to us for critical priorities like mitigating HPAI and measles, providing long-term care for older adults, and ensuring access to immunizations for children,” he added. “As a result of taking the Administration to court, these dollars will now start flowing again. I’ll keep standing up to defend Pennsylvania taxpayers, permanently reverse these unlawful cuts, and hold the federal government to the commitments it has made to our Commonwealth.”

McElroy was appointed by Trump in his first term in 2019.

President Donald Trump and his allies have decried the stumbling blocks set in front of his agenda by judges, but some critics have scolded the administration for trying to shut down judicial dissent outside the traditional appellate process.

“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” wrote Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts in a brief statement.

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

​Trump appointed judges, Trump cuts to health care, Shapiro vs trump, Judges vs trump, Politics 

You’re watching nothing less than a judicial coup take place against Donald Trump’s administration and, by extension, the voters who supported him. To suppress a populist movement like those that won at the ballot box in 2016 and 2024, political operatives rely on institutions not directly accountable to the people.

During Trump’s first term, unelected intelligence officials, long-serving bureaucrats, and nanny-staters with decades-old security clearances became conduits for leaks between the special counsel’s office and the media.

Trump’s presidency is once again on the line. And here we are, stuck on the same ride. Anyone ready to get off?

When Attorney General Bill Barr moved to shut down the Russia collusion hoax, a new group stepped in. Unelected public health “experts” took the lead in shoving COVID-19 down our throats as the kept media amplified their every word.

Caving to that narrative ultimately led to Trump’s defeat in 2020. Now, another wave of unelected bureaucrats appear to be working to derail his triumphant second term — this time using a familiar line from the left: “The courts have spoken.”

For years, Republican leaders have largely accepted such proclamations without pushback. One example of this passive approach is the removal of prayer from public schools — a significant moment in the broader trend. But how did that happen?

It wasn’t the result of a policy from the Department of Education, which didn’t exist for another two decades. Instead, the shift began with the Supreme Court’s 1962 decision in Engel v. Vitale. The ruling applied what later became known as the Lemon test, which broadly interpreted the establishment clause of the First Amendment. According to the spirit of the age, that meant nearly any expression of religion not rooted in secularism faced constitutional challenges.

No American generation before ours would have signed off on these rulings at the ballot box. But once the courts handed them down, the public was expected to fall in line. In 1973, the Supreme Court delivered Roe v. Wade, effectively legalizing abortion nationwide — without a single vote cast by the people. It was a sweeping mandate, imposed from the bench.

In 1982, the court went farther. In Plyler v. Doe, justices declared that states must use taxpayer money to fund public education for children of illegal immigrants. Again, no vote, no debate — just a ruling.

Then came 2005. In Kelo v. New London, the court ruled that the government could seize private homes and farms, not for public roads or schools, but to hand over to private developers in the name of “economic development.” Would voters have approved that kind of land-grab? Of course not. That’s why the court stepped in and did it for them.

For decades, the courts laid the groundwork. Then came the breaking point: same-sex marriage. In United States v. Windsor (2013) and Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), the Supreme Court overruled the will of tens of millions of voters. I was involved in those battles before Windsor — and I remember them clearly. We won 31 consecutive state referendums defining marriage as between a man and a woman. In California alone, over 8 million voters backed biblical marriage — on the same day Barack Obama won 60% of the statewide vote.

But the courts didn’t care. They stepped in and handed Democrats legal victories they could never have achieved through Congress or at the ballot box. Again and again, the judiciary gave Democratic causes the stamp of legitimacy, even as public support wavered.

If Democrats had been forced to legislate these changes, they would have paid the price. In fact, they did. After ramming through Obamacare, Democrats lost more than 1,000 federal, state, and local elections over the next three cycles.

Remember, the GOP controlled both chambers of Congress and the White House after the 2016 election — yet Obamacare survived untouched. Why? Because some on the political right prefer having issues to campaign on rather than solving them. It’s easier to grift off outrage than to govern with principle.

Which brings us to today: Trump’s presidency is once again on the line. And here we are, stuck on the same ride. Anyone ready to get off?

With a feckless, do-nothing Congress, real change will only come from Trump and his administration. Like it or not, he’s become our Abraham Lincoln — whether or not you want to see him on Mount Rushmore. And just as Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, Trump may need to deliver his own version to free the public from the judicial class that continues to rule without consent.

Venezuelan drug lords have more of a right to step on the soil of America than an unborn baby right now. We cannot sustain a civilization like that, nor do we deserve to.

​Judicial supremacy, Judicial tyranny, Supreme court, Congress, Republicans, Democrats, Obergefell v. hodges, Roe v. wade, Kelo v. new london, Abortion, Immigration, Gay marriage, United states v. windsor, Lemon test, Department of education, Engel v. vitale, Plyler v. doe, Illegal aliens, California, Opinion & analysis 

A teenager was arrested after he allegedly pointed a gun at Chipotle workers for refusing to share the password to their Wi-Fi service, Georgia police said.

Workers at the restaurant in metro Atlanta on South Cobb Drive called police to report that a customer had threatened them on Saturday in the drive-thru of the store.

‘The suspect swung at the officer, striking him, causing minor injuries.’

Cobb County Police identified the young man as Zaccur Garrett.

“The suspect decided to escalate the situation and brandish a firearm and pointed it at employees,” said Officer Aaron Wilson.

Wilson said that police responded and found Garrett outside a hotel across the street from the Chipotle. They believe he discarded the gun in a trash can.

“This guy likely knew police were on the way and discarded it because he knew he wasn’t supposed to have it. The firearm came back stolen out of Atlanta,” Wilson added.

Police said that the teenager also punched a police officer as he was adjusting the handcuffs.

“The suspect swung at the officer, striking him, causing minor injuries,” Wilson continued.

Garrett allegedly added to the charges he was already facing by kicking a camera in the patrol car and damaging it. He faces charges of interference with government property and aggravated assault on a police officer as well as the gun charges.

“He has several charges including three outstanding warrants from another county for violent offenses. In Cobb County, he’s facing six charges,” Wilson added.

Customers of the restaurant told WAGA-TV that they were shocked by the violence but that it had gotten worse since the pandemic.

“I think especially in Atlanta lately, they just pull out guns and do some crazy things,” said Laura Friends. “It is absolutely insane. We’re not required to have Wi-Fi.”

Garrett’s booking photo can be viewed on the WAGA news video on YouTube.

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

​Chipotle gun brandishing, Atlanta crime, Zaccur garrett, Arrested over wifi, Crime 

In the 1990s, the two largest food companies were R.J. Reynolds and Philip Morris — both of which also still make highly addictive cigarettes to this day.

So it’s no wonder that our food, like cigarettes, is also incredibly addictive.

“I mean, they took scientists to make our food addictive and have thousands of chemicals that they’ve co-opted the scientific agencies like the FDA and the USDA to let them in,” White House adviser Calley Means tells James Poulos on “Zero Hour.”

“Our food is literally weaponized to be addictive,” he adds.

“The science has become absolutely just a PR mechanism for industries that want us sick,” he continues, noting that 77% of Americans of military age are not able to join the military because of poor metabolic health.

But it’s not just food that’s making Americans sick.

“I think one of the big issues with health and metabolic health is that a lot of the things that threaten us, I think threaten us to an existential degree, are part of modern innovation. Like you look at artificial light, it’s actually really disruptive,” Means explains.

“It’s really disruptive to our hormone system,” he continues. “If you have a light on in a chicken coop, they lay two times more eggs. That’s just one input. You look at all the technology, being on our phone all day, the food that we have, all this disruption to our circadian rhythm, our chronic stress.”

These advancements in technology, Means says, have “led us to get detached from nature” and “detached from the awe and curiosity of our bodies.”

And these industries making us sick have zeroed in on children.

“The invisible hand of the incentives of these industries,” Means explains, “from tech that wants our kids addicted to their phones all day, to food which wants kids addicted, to the pharmaceutical industry that wants kids on drugs, there’s really, I think, an invisible hand that’s been against kids.”

“There’s millions and billions and hundreds of billions and trillions of dollars to be made from getting a kid sick, from getting them addicted, from keeping them in fear,” he continues. “This is something that the Trump administration, just in modern society today, we have to balance, because we do want to unleash responsible innovation, but we have lost touch of common sense.”

“And I think that’s kind of the message that Bobby Kennedy and Trump have really resonated on. It’s really a getting back to basics message,” he adds.

Want more from James Poulos?

To enjoy more of James’s visionary commentary on politics, tech, ideas, and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Camera phone, Free, Sharing, Upload, Video, Video phone, Youtube.com, Zero hour with james poulos, Zero hour, James poulos, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Calley means, Rfk jr, Donald trump, The trump administration, Big pharma, Big food, Big tech, The pharmaceutical industry, Big tobacco 

The United States banned its government personnel from having romantic or sexual relationships in China with Chinese citizens.

The news of the ban just surfaced. However, the policy was reportedly put in place back in January by President Biden’s ambassador to China, Nicholas Burns, just before he left the communist country.

The Associated Press cited four people who allegedly have direct knowledge of the policy, which was more softly enacted in the summer of 2024. The previous rules surrounded American personnel being barred from having “romantic and sexual relations” with Chinese citizens who worked as guards or other support staff at any of the U.S. consulates or the U.S. embassy in China. Burns then expanded the rules in January, reportedly just days before President Trump took office.

Burns allegedly brought up the rule changes after members of Congress had contacted him and said the restrictions on the government employees were not tough enough.

‘He will not participate in your story.’

The most famous case of recent Chinese spying through romantic connections is likely the Chinese operative Feng Feng, who went by Christine Fang.

According to a bombshell report by Axios in 2020, the spy had sexual or romantic relationships with at least two mayors of Midwestern cities in the span of three years, one of which involved a sexual encounter with a mayor from Ohio. That encounter was in a car that was under electronic FBI surveillance at the time.

The spy also took part in fundraising activity for Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) in 2014 for his re-election campaign. Swalwell was not charged for any wrongdoing; however, the spy allegedly helped place at least one intern in the congressman’s office.

“Rep. Swalwell, long ago, provided information about this person — whom he met more than eight years ago, and whom he hasn’t seen in nearly six years — to the FBI,” Swalwell’s office told the outlet at the time. “To protect information that might be classified, he will not participate in your story.”

The new policy covers any U.S. employees at American installations in mainland China, including the embassy in Beijing and consulates in Guangzhou, Shanghai, Shenyang, and Wuhan. It also applies to the American consulate in Hong Kong.

Those who are already in relationships with Chinese citizens can apply for exemptions.

According to the report’s sources, who agreed to speak only under the condition of anonymity, the directive is also deemed to be confidential and was communicated both verbally and electronically to American personnel in China in January.

The details of what defines a “romantic or sexual relationship” were not provided to reporters.

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

​Spy, Spying, China, Ambassador, Feng feng, Consulate, Us government, Politics 

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. told Blaze Media that his office is working on a new food pyramid of nutritional recommendations and changing standards in school food preparation.

Kennedy was being interviewed by BlazeTV host Sara Gonzalez of “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered” when he said that the Biden administration had implemented unworkable nutrition standards that he was working to update.

‘We want a three-page document that essentially says you should be eating whole foods.’

“We’re doing that right now,” said Kennedy. “When we came in, the Biden administration had created new nutrition guidelines, but they were unworkable, and they were supposed go into effect Jan. 20. I asked President Trump to give us permission to kick the ball down to March.”

Kennedy has been known for criticizing food production and advocating for a return to whole foods rather than mass-produced food that is less healthy.

“The document that we got from the Biden administration was 453 pages long. Oh, it’s completely useless to a mother or to a school. And what I said is, ‘We want a three-page document that essentially says you should be eating whole foods,'” Kennedy continued.

“And give the schools the option of getting those whole foods locally. So that you’re not dictating exactly what the diet is, but you’re dictating broad categories and saying these are the kinds of things — we don’t want a lot of plastic packaging, we want hot foods that are hopefully made on site,” he added.

“We should have nutritionists in every school in this country like they do in Japan and in other nations that are supervising the food production and the nutrition of those kids and have much healthier kids,” he concluded. “We need to make this investment in our children.”

Kennedy had previously told Gonzales that he was working on cutting down the waste in the department in order to make it far more lean and efficient.

Here’s the video of Kennedy’s comments:

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

​Rfk jr school food, Rfk jr food pyramid, Food pyramid, Rfk jr on blaze tv, Politics 

General Motors announced on Thursday to its workforce that the company will be increasing production of its light-duty trucks at a plant in Fort Wayne, Indiana, to avoid the reciprocal tariffs implemented by President Donald Trump.

Reuters reported that the Fort Wayne plant makes the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra trucks. GM also manufactures those trucks at plants in Mexico and Canada, with around half of GM’s large pickup truck production done in Mexico and Canada. The company will likely add more overtime hours, along with hiring more temporary workers to increase production output at the Indiana plant.

‘It’s also proper for advanced economies like the United States to insist on reciprocity from nations like China.’

A GM source told Reuters that the number of new workers needed will be in the hundreds. GM CEO Mary Barra had floated the idea of increasing output in U.S.-based factories in the January earnings call because of Trump’s campaign promise to prevent the country from being taken advantage of.

GM’s decision less than 24 hours after Trump’s announcement of the reciprocal tariffs is seen as a welcome sign of their purpose: to bring manufacturing jobs back to the United States to the benefit of American workers. While it will take several years to fully onshore manufacturing capabilities back to our country, the Trump administration says this onshoring will be the first of many.

Indiana Senator Jim Banks (R) was happy with GM’s decision. He is originally from Fort Wayne.

“This is great news. We’re just getting started,” Banks said.

— (@)

Responding to critics of Trump’s newly implemented tariffs, Banks posted video on X of former President Barack Obama saying in 2018, “It’s also proper for advanced economies like the United States to insist on reciprocity from nations like China that are no longer solely poorer countries, to make sure they are providing access to their markets.”

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

​Politics