Yesterday, Homeland Security Investigations agents executed a judicially authorized search warrant at Minnesota Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar’s Washington, D.C., home as part of an ongoing federal criminal investigation into alleged immigration fraud, which Fox News reported was tied to childhood paperwork filed by her late father, Nur Omar Mohamed.

Glenn Beck calls the authorization of this raid very “significant” because a federal judge in D.C. — a place notorious for some of the most radically left-wing judges in the nation — found probable cause sufficient to authorize the raid three weeks before midterm elections.

“If I were … the attorney general and I had DHS agents come in and they said, ‘Sir, we need a warrant to go into Ilhan Omar’s home,’ I would look at those agents and say, ‘Are you out of your mind? Show me the evidence.’ And if it wasn’t a very, very high standard of evidence, especially right before an election … I don’t think I would approve it,” Glenn says. “I’d say, ‘Come see me in three weeks. … Come see me when you have more than this,’ only because this is a political firestorm, and that does matter.”

As of now, Glenn isn’t sure how this will play out.

“This could be really, really good, or this could be really, really, really bad. You don’t take her on unless you have it,” he says.

Glenn’s chief writer and researcher, Jason Buttrill, notes that on September 13, White House border czar Tom Homan appeared on Fox News and confirmed that there was an “ongoing criminal investigation” involving Rep. Ilhan Omar. He specifically referenced possible immigration violations and marriage fraud.

“So, just a few weeks ago, Tom Homan confirms that, and today there is a raid at least on her Washington, D.C., home, and we’re still not sure about her other home back in Minnesota,” he says.

But what Glenn wants to know is what Omar could possibly have in her home to warrant an authorized raid.

“It’s not a general search. You have to go and say, ‘We believe this evidence is in the house, and we believe it most likely is in a safe or in a bedroom,’ or whatever,” he says.

Even evidence she “married her brother,” he says, would not be enough to authorize a home raid.

“What are you going to find? Literally, what are you going to find? … Maybe a family album with your brother in it as a family member?” Glenn says.

“I don’t know. Apparently, a judge was convinced off of something that may or may not be there,” Jason says.

Glenn, stunned that a D.C. judge of all people authorized this raid, says he “[hopes] that it’s a fair judge but a judge on their side.”

“I’m hoping that they got a judge who’s not just a crazy Republican,” he sighs. “This is going to matter how it plays out in the press. … And you know how it’s going to play out in the press, so please, please, DHS, don’t have done anything and cut any corner.”

To hear more, watch the video above.

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.

​Glenn beck, Ilhan omar, Immigration fraud, Blazetv show 

The campaign for Democrat Abdul El-Sayed has released a bizarre statement after unearthed text messages seemingly contradict his claims denying ties between his family and the Muslim Brotherhood.

El-Sayed is vying to keep the U.S. Senate seat from Michigan under Democratic control, but he has had trouble with some traditional Democrat voters, including Jews, because of his extremism.

‘Abdul’s family is directly tied to the Muslim Brotherhood. Maybe one day he will tell Michiganders the truth … But if not, you can just take his sister’s word for it.’

“Can you set the record straight about whether you or your family have any ties to the Muslim Brotherhood?” NBC News’ Kristen Welker asked El-Sayed on “Meet the Press” Sunday.

“No, but let’s talk about this,” came the reply.

Welker jumped in and asked for clarification: “No, you don’t have any ties? And your family doesn’t?”

El-Sayed responded, “No,” to both questions.

A Washington Free Beacon report published that same day documented posts from over a decade ago by El-Sayed‘s maternal half-sister indicating her family had supported and been involved with the Muslim Brotherhood since at least the early ’70s.

“Had an amazing talk with my mom about her activism in the Muslim Brotherhood during the early 70s while she was in college #respect,” Eman Abdelhadi wrote in 2012.

“My family has long been MB, but I’ve always felt that it has navigated the political sphere poorly/destructively,” she wrote in another post from the same year.

“Although I lean towards the Leftists; conversations with my #MB family in Egypt revealed respect for individual liberties & secular state,” she also wrote in 2012.

In response to the resurfaced posts from Abdelhadi, a spokesperson for El-Sayed issued a statement that did not deny the authenticity of the posts or address the substance of them, vaguely referring to them only as “lies” and Islamophobic “attacks” from Republican Mike Rogers.

“Abdul is a dad and a doctor. He has spent his entire career working to keep Michiganders healthy and safe,” reads the statement from El-Sayed campaign spokesperson Roxie Richner to Bill Melugin of Fox News.

“Independent fact checkers have repeatedly debunked Mike’s lies, but their campaign continues to use bad faith attacks on Abdul’s faith and family. Mike wants to distract from Trump’s agenda that is terrorizing Michigan families at the pump and at the grocery store.”

The campaign also indicated, according to Melugin, that it considers the Muslim Brotherhood allegations “racist” and “untrue.”

The Rogers campaign slammed El-Sayed over the resurfaced posts.

“Facts are facts. Abdul’s family is directly tied to the Muslim Brotherhood. Maybe one day he will tell Michiganders the truth… But if not, you can just take his sister’s word for it,” reads a statement posted Tuesday on Rogers’ social media account.

Greg Manz, the senior communications adviser of the Michigan GOP, pounced on El-Sayed in a statement sent to Blaze News.

“Beyond being an America-hating terrorist sympathizer funded by the Muslim Brotherhood, Conman Abdul’s response to being exposed as having family members in an Egyptian-founded terrorist organization, coupled with the Muslim Brotherhood publicly celebrating his primary victory, suggests that Conman Abdul may, in fact, be a sociopath,” Manz wrote.

RELATED: Islamic Society of North America illegally supported Muslim candidate’s campaign, congressman says

El-Sayed previously implied that racism was animating the extremist allegations.

“I don’t dignify those kinds of claims because, at the end of the day, again, this is about trying to point to somebody whose name is different to make all kinds of hearsay accusations that are just not worth the dignity of a response,” he said to reporters after the debate with Rogers Thursday.

El-Sayed and Abdelhadi’s birth mother long worked for a group that was later labeled a specially designated global terrorist organization and that may also have helped fund al-Qaeda. She was never charged with any crime.

El-Sayed has a slight lead over Rogers in current polling, which can be tracked via Blaze News’ Poll Watch:

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

​Abdul el-sayed, Mike rogers, Us senate, Michigan, Muslim brotherhood, Islam, Politics 

Certain types of bets shouldn’t be allowed, and the NFL says it knows which ones cause the most corruption.

The league is so sure, in fact, it wants the Supreme Court to weigh in on the regulatory issues surrounding prediction markets.

‘The NFL’s highest priority is preserving the integrity of its games.’

In September, New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport asked the Supreme Court of the United States to review a court decision that puts prediction markets under the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which makes them only subject to federal regulation.

The petition has since been joined by about 40 states.

The NFL wrote an amicus brief last week in support of New Jersey’s petition for SCOTUS to grant certiorari, meaning a judicial review, of platforms like Kalshi, which the league mentioned by name.

The football league argued that prediction markets allow bets that otherwise wouldn’t — and shouldn’t, in their view — be possible to make on sporting events, due to the impact they could have on the integrity of games.

“Federally designated contract markets (DCMs) like respondent Kalshi” are not “subject to the same rigorous regulatory constructs and oversight provided by state gaming authorities,” the NFL wrote.

The league claimed that on the first Sunday of the 2026 NFL season, more than half of all prediction market trading was related to the NFL, $1.8 billion out of $3.3 billion. Simply put, there is a lot of risk that comes out of such a high volume of wagers.

The league says integrity is at stake when bets on injuries, individuals’ plays, and referee calls are allowed, all of which they say can be easily known or individually manipulated.

In a media kit outlining the league’s approach to betting, the NFL explained the type of bets it believes should be barred.

Bets that are “inherently objectionable” are listed first, which are defined as being “derogatory or inflammatory” and related to player injuries, fan safety, or misconduct.

This would likely include infamous wagers placed on events, like sex toys being thrown on the court at WNBA games.

RELATED: What’s really behind the opposition to data centers

Aaron M. Sprecher/Getty Images

Bets based on outcomes that are “100% determinable by one person in one play,” like a field goal attempt or pass completion, should also be banned, the NFL says, as should those involving predetermined outcomes “directly related to on-field competition,” such as a team’s first play being a run or pass.

These and “officiating-related” bets being allowed present an “undue to risk to game integrity,” the league says.

“The NFL’s highest priority is preserving the integrity of its games,” the league reiterated in its brief.

“State and sportsbook protections include bans on manipulable or objectionable bets, information-sharing agreements regarding official league data for accurate bet settlement, and bet monitoring to ensure that league insiders do not trade on material nonpublic information,” it added.

The NFL pushed further restrictions, such as increasing the age requirement of prediction markets from 18 to 21 years old.

Furthermore, the NFL said there simply aren’t enough regulators monitoring sporting events at the federal level, especially when compared to state regulators.

“Nevada and Pennsylvania, for instance, have close to 400 employees each. … The Commission, meanwhile, has only 543 employees covering the entire country and whose responsibilities include a broad range of derivatives beyond event contracts,” the NFL argued.

RELATED: Curious about prediction markets? Stu Burguiere shows you the ropes.

Aaron M. Sprecher/Getty Images

A Kalshi spokesperson told the New York Post in a statement that its top priority is market integrity.

“That priority is reflected in the fact that every other major sports league and integrity partner in the United States is partnering with Kalshi – including the MLB, NHL, and others,” the spokesperson said.

“Contrary to the NFL’s statements, the CFTC is actively policing sports-related markets, which are now listed on nearly every U.S. commodities exchange,” Kalshi added.

Polymarket told the Post that it shares the NFL’s commitment to integrity, stating that as the reason behind its “advanced market surveillance tools” and collaboration with federal regulators.

The NFL has partnerships with three betting platforms for the 2026 season: DraftKings, FanDuel, and Fanatics Betting and Gaming.

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

​Gambling, Prediction markets, Kalshi, Nfl, Polymarket, Tech 

In the face of concerns over the importation of millions of migrants from Islamic terrorist hotbeds and the unlikelihood of their assimilation, then-Chancellor of Germany Angela Merkel stated in August 2015, “We can do it.”

Merkel’s optimism has not aged well.

‘Child marriages are incompatible with our values.’

The influx of migrants from the Middle East not only corresponded to a dramatic rise in Islamic terrorist attacks and helped drive a spike in crime, especially rape, but apparently left Europe with a child marriage problem.

In response to a parliamentary query from two members of the Alternative for Germany party, better known as the AFD, the interior ministry of the southwestern German state of Baden-Wurttemberg revealed in September that hundreds of child marriages have taken place in the region since Merkel made her infamous statement.

Martin Rothweiler, the leader of the AFD in the Baden-Wurttemberg state parliament, said Tuesday in a statement on X that was translated by the platform, “Our country and our values are being abolished before our very eyes.”

The Tübingen Regional Council has been recording child marriages in Baden-Wurttemberg — home to roughly 13.46% of the total German population — since 2012. Between 2017 and 2026, the regional council recorded 358 child marriages with victims as young as 11, according to the interior ministry’s report.

RELATED: Diversity is our strength? Britain has to remind migrants: Don’t rape kids

RALF HIRSCHBERGER/AFP via Getty Images

Under German law, minors 14 years and younger are considered children, and those 15 to 18 are considered adolescents. This is in keeping with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which holds that “a child means every human being below the age of eighteen years unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier.”

The men marrying these minors were predominantly from Syria, Turkey, Bulgaria, Afghanistan, and Iraq.

Only eight of the recorded child marriages since 2012 — including a marriage between a 16-year-old German girl and a 25-year-old Pakistani man and a marriage between a 14-year-old Afghan girl and a 30-year-old Afghan man — were broken up with a legally binding annulment, according to the report.

The government noted that there are no legal proceedings under way to annul any of the other marriages.

The state report also noted that of the 271 cases recorded last year by the state-funded counseling center YASEMIN, 80 cases involved individuals at risk of forced marriage. In these forced-marriage cases, 33 individuals were minors — four of whom were under the age of 12, five of whom were 12, and two of whom were 13.

Emely Knorr, one of the AFD politicians who requested the data, said last week in a statement on Instagram for which Euronews has published a translation, “Child marriages are incompatible with our values. Children have a right to safety, education, and a self-determined future. That is why we need effective protection, early intervention, and resolute action against forced marriages.”

Nikolaos Boutakoglou, the other AFD politician behind the query, said earlier this month in a statement on X translated by the platform, “Almost every single child marriage in Baden-Württemberg since 2017 can be traced back to mass migration!”

“Nearly 40% of child marriages were contracted between Syrians, while child marriages between two Germans account for only 0.3%!” Boutakoglou added.

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

​Child marriage, Muslim, Germany, Europe, Migration, Angela merkel, Politics 

The Pentagon has just announced that it will livestream the execution of the Fort Hood shooter, Nidal Hasan, who killed 12 U.S. service members and one civilian in 2009.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says the firing squad will carry out the sentence at Fort Hood, where Hasan’s attack took place.

“Execution by firing squad,” Hegseth said in a brief interview. “Army major betrays his country. Radical Islamist kills a bunch of Americans at Fort Hood. Of course we’re going to do it at Fort Hood. We’re going to do it on a Thursday. We’re going to do it at 1 o’clock, which is when he did it.”

“It’s going to be soldiers with rifles executing the firing squad. It hasn’t been since World War II since we’ve done that. Well, I kind of like the mentality we had in World War II, which was win. Which was understand when the enemy attacks you, you need to stand your ground,” he continued.

“So, it was a radical Islamist terror attack. Remember what Obama called it? Workplace violence? I mean, that’s what we’re up against,” he added.

Unlike those who are critical of the decision to livestream the execution, BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales is on board.

“I know there are some people, even on the right, who are like, ‘Well, livestreaming it just really glorifies violence, and I just don’t know how I feel about that,’” Gonzales says.

Ross Patterson of the “Drinkin’ Bros” podcast agrees, telling Gonzales that he’s admittedly “amped” for the execution.

“I say line up a full pay-per-view card,” he says, noting that back in the day, executions were public for a reason.

“I mean, it couldn’t happen to a more deserving person, obviously, but I do agree with you that they made them public for a reason,” Gonzales responds.

“So, I totally agree with you, and I’m sure you will not be shocked to hear that the mainstream media is now trying to spin this story to portray the Fort Hood shooter as somehow the victim,” she continues.

Gonzales cites an article from Reuters that reads, “Extrajudicial lynchings in the United States, often by white mobs targeting Black Americans, were public spectacles well into the 20th century.”

“As if that has anything to f**king do with this conversation about a radical Islamist who went in and targeted military service members,” Gonzales says.

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.

​Execution, Fort hood, Pentagon, Pete hegseth, Nidal hassan, Sara gonzales, Blazetv show, Livestream 

A 74-year-old retired U.S. Postal Service worker blasted a gang of teens who brutally beat him up outside a Baltimore 7-Eleven over the summer — a viral incident that was captured on surveillance video.

Baltimore Police posted video in July showing six “younger males” engaging in the attack while wielding a rifle and a sword, police said.

‘All they’re doing is hurting people or killing people.’

Police said the “attempted armed robbery” occurred in the 2500 block of Liberty Heights Avenue around 3:46 a.m. July 7.

Ade Tokumbo spoke with WBFF-TV last week about the attack he endured, which occurred not far from his home.

“I didn’t say a thing to them, and they started attacking me, and I defended myself,” Tokumbo told the station.

“When they did that to me, all right, I did not think of them as kids or children. I think of them for what they are: goddamn demonic hood rats,” he also told WBFF.

The station said Tokumbo walked up to the store’s door, not realizing it was closed, and he noted that one suspect approached him with a semiautomatic weapon, after which several others joined in. A 7-Eleven employee told WJZ-TV the store was closed at the time of the attack.

Tokumbo told WBFF the group demanded money and his car, but he refused and fought back “to defend myself.”

Surveillance video shows the group surrounding the victim and taking turns shoving him and throwing objects at him while he does his best to fight them off and shield himself.

But one cowardly culprit sneaks behind the man and shoves him to the parking lot surface, after which the others take turns stomping him. One of the attackers appears to bash the victim over the head with the rifle.

In another portion of the video, the elderly man goes after a suspect appearing to hold the rifle, but a second suspect throws an object at the victim from behind, then scampers away.

Soon a suspect appearing to hold a sword approaches the victim and waves it at him before he and another attacker throw objects at the elderly man at the same time.

“Look, I paid for that [car], all right? I’m not going to let a criminal do what they want to do,” Tokumbo added to the station. “I have absolutely no respect for criminals, all right? I have no respect for them at all.”

RELATED: Violent punks caught on video ganging up on, brutally beating elderly man by Baltimore 7-Eleven — while wielding rifle, sword

In one of the more gut-wrenching portions of the video, the victim is holding what appears to be a pair of milk crates to defend himself when one of the attackers shoves him to the parking lot surface, after which he’s stomped and punched.

Seconds later, after the victim rises to his feet, the same attacker who just shoved him from behind repeats his cowardly act, knocking the elderly man to the ground from behind again — and then skips away in what appears to be a kind of celebration.

The victim tries to get up, but the same attacker who knocked him down twice jumps in the air and kicks him. The video doesn’t show how the incident was resolved.

Tokumbo told WBFF that he suffered serious injuries, including fractured ribs.

And three months later, still no arrests have been made in what police characterized as an attempted armed robbery, the station said.

In his interview with WBFF, Tokumbo expressed frustration with how the suspects were being described: “See, you keep on saying ‘juveniles’ and ‘young people.’ I told you, all right, I don’t think of them that way because they don’t act that way. All right? … They’re doing absolutely nothing, all right, to assist us, all right, to help other people. All they’re doing is hurting people or killing people.”

The station said those with information are asked to call Baltimore Police at 410-366-6311; callers wishing to remain anonymous can use the Metro Crime Stoppers tip line at 1-866-7LOCKUP (1-866-756-2587).

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

​Baltimore, Elderly man attacked, Teens, Police, 7 eleven, Brutal beating, Crime, Attempted armed robbery 

They can’t fire him this time.

While Shane Gillis’ latest “Saturday Night Live” monologue continues to inflame his liberal critics, some former cast members were wholly unoffended by his remarks — and even defended the jokes that sent social media into another meltdown.

‘When did “camel toe” become acceptable gym fashion?’

Hump day

Gillis said that going to public gyms in New York City is a “nightmare” because they’re filled with the “hottest gay guys you’ve ever seen,” before adding that he didn’t realize “women just dress like whores now” at the gym.

Actor Dan Levy responded by arguing that more men should stand up to remarks like Gillis’ or risk normalizing misogyny.

But two former “SNL” cast members, quoted in Entertainment Weekly’s recap of Saturday’s episode, took no issue with the comedian’s comments.

Victoria Jackson, who was a cast member from 1986 to 1992, called Gillis’ monologue “good.”

“Shane looks skinny/handsome! He’s right about gym girls dressing like ‘whores,'” Jackson said. “When did ‘camel toe’ become acceptable gym fashion and grocery shopping attire?”

Jeff Richards, who was on the sketch show from 2001 to 2004, simply called Gillis a “really funny guy, obvious natural.”

RELATED: Roseanne promises her comeback sitcom will offend everyone: ‘The extras are going to be released on OnlyFans’

Public enemy

Travis Kelce, NFL star and husband of Taylor Swift, dared to show his support by liking a post featuring Gillis’ monologue on social media, Heavy reported. The like quickly made him a target of online backlash.

Plenty of other celebrities were less amused.

Singer Maren Morris posted a bizarre video of herself giving the camera the middle finger with the caption, “me being a wh0re at the gym.”

Maggie Baird, the mother of singer Billie Eilish and an activist according to Billboard, said she “literally gasped” over Gillis’ jokes.

Other celebrities joining the criticism included “Wicked” star Kristin Chenoweth, singer Jewel, and rapper Flavor Flav, who called it “important allyship” to stand against the monologue.

RELATED: Actor MELTS DOWN over jokes about women in Shane Gillis’ ‘SNL’ monologue

Irish goodbye

Current “SNL” cast member Michael Che, meanwhile, remarked on Instagram that every question he fields while promoting his new comedy special will probably now be about Gillis.

“Gotta do more press this week to promote the special … wonder what every f—ing questions gonna be about,” Che wrote. “Thanks a lot shane.”

Gillis generated still more controversy when he accidentally dropped an F-bomb during a Dr. Seuss sketch. But NBC insiders told TMZ that he won’t be banned over the slip-up.

And Gillis attracted yet another round of attention when unaired footage showed him walking off during the show’s final credits, when the host and cast traditionally linger onstage after the good-nights.

Saturday marked Gillis’ third hosting gig on the show since being fired in 2019, after a social media user dug up jokes he’d made about Chinese immigrants and gay people on his comedy podcast the previous year.

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

​Saturday night live, Shane gillis, Nbc, Woke, Entertainment 

On Columbus Day, Homeland Security Investigations showed up before dawn at Minnesota Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar’s Washington, D.C., residence with a court-authorized search warrant. That fact does not prove Omar committed a crime, and it does not by itself answer the Democrats’ charge that politics infected the investigation. It does mean the Justice Department put enough evidence before a judge to establish probable cause that evidence of a crime would be found there.

That is not nothing.

The standard should be simple: No political enemy gets convicted by press release, and no member of Congress gets sanctuary by title.

We are still short on details, which is normal at this stage. The Justice Department has confirmed only that the search was part of an ongoing federal criminal investigation. Multiple reports say the probe concerns immigration paperwork connected to Omar’s family, but the government has not publicly laid out its theory or disclosed what agents were seeking.

The investigation has a long history. In September, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said there was an ongoing probe and claimed, “We know that she married her brother to try to bring him into the United States.” Omar has long denied that allegation, and the government has not publicly produced evidence establishing it. Mullin also suggested investigators were looking more broadly at the family’s immigration history.

Omar’s finances have drawn separate scrutiny. A 2024 congressional disclosure appeared to value assets tied largely to her husband’s businesses at between $6 million and $30 million. Later disclosures and corrections put the couple’s assets dramatically lower, with Omar’s office blaming an “accounting error” that overstated the value of the businesses. Fox News reported revised figures between roughly $18,000 and $95,000. Quite a discrepancy.

In January, the Oversight Project flagged more than $1 million in earmarks pushed by Omar and Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) for Minneapolis nonprofits whose operations raised serious questions. The money was removed from the spending bill, and Sens. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) asked the Justice Department to investigate.

So now we wait. But whatever investigators presented was enough to get a warrant. To borrow Omar’s much-debated 2019 phrase about 9/11 and the civil liberties backlash that followed, “some people did something.” Here, the Justice Department did something more concrete: It put its evidence before a court and got permission to search.

House Democrat leaders immediately called the raid “corrupt weaponization” and a “rogue abuse of power.” They are certainly free to make that case. But Trump’s hostility toward Omar does not make evidence disappear. The proper test is the evidence, not the defendant’s politics or job title.

I have been a tough critic of the Department of Homeland Security for failing to deliver the mass-deportation agenda voters were promised. If Monday’s search is part of a legitimate criminal case, the DHS deserves credit for pursuing it without treating a member of Congress as untouchable.

A broader political problem also extends beyond Omar: the rise of socialism. Too many elected officials increasingly treat ethnic identity and foreign attachment as competing sources of political allegiance, while attacking the institutions charged with enforcing immigration law.

RELATED: The right is building its own lawfare defense machine — finally

Arturbo/Getty Images

Take Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.). Last year, after remarks she delivered in Spanish in Mexico City, we argued that she had put Guatemalan identity ahead of American allegiance. She has now gone farther in policy terms: pushing mass amnesty and gutting enforcement. Her Reimagining Safety Act would dismantle the Department of Homeland Security and abolish ICE while moving some existing functions into a new department.

Or look at Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-N.J.), who faces federal charges arising from a confrontation at the Delaney Hall immigration detention facility. She argued that congressional oversight and the Speech or Debate Clause insulated her from prosecution. In August, the Third Circuit blew that argument out of the water. McIver denies wrongdoing, but the legal theory that a member’s oversight role makes ordinary criminal law disappear has already failed in court.

Republicans are not immune from this politics either. Rep. María Elvira Salazar (R-Fla.) recently released an ad attacking Trump’s immigration enforcement as having “gone too far” and warned that Hispanic voters who backed him in 2024 “feel betrayed.” It is yet another example of a politician speaking as representatives of an ethnic voting bloc first and as advocates of a uniform immigration law second.

RELATED: The mass-deportation promise is disappearing

PATRICK T. FALLON/AFP/Getty Images

Congress should respond to this problem carefully, not with ticky-tack retaliation over political speech. Disagreeing with America’s immigration laws, criticizing ICE, or invoking an ethnic heritage are not crimes. Declaring allegiance to a foreign country and flagrantly violating constitutional oaths is another matter.

That is why Monday’s search should be treated neither as a conviction nor as a meaningless political stunt. A warrant is not a verdict. If the investigation ultimately produces evidence that Omar committed immigration fraud, made material false statements, or engaged in other serious criminal conduct, Congress should act under its own rules rather than hide behind the slow pace of criminal litigation.

Committee assignments and access to sensitive government information are privileges Congress controls. Due process does not require institutional paralysis. The standard should be simple: No political enemy gets convicted by press release, and no member of Congress gets sanctuary by title.

​Assets, Civil liberties, Columbus day, Democrats, Federal charges, Fraud, Homeland security, Ilhan omar, Immigration enforcement, Immigration fraud, Markwayne mullin, Marriage, Mass deportation, Search warrant, Washington dc, Immigration laws, Finances, Trump, Opinion & analysis 

Most people wouldn’t even question whether AI is conscious. It is not knitted together by the hand of God. It doesn’t have its own moral compass, independent thoughts, or emotions. It has no soul. Yet Anthropic desperately tried to convince religious scholars, leaders, and even the pope that Claude is sentient, but in lieu of a blessing, the company was rebuked instead.

Going back to April 2026, Anthropic has wined and dined with a number of religious scholars of various religions, backgrounds, and locales, all under temporary NDA so as not to leak the true content of their meetings. As each meeting went along, it quickly devolved into talks of Claude, Anthropic’s frontier AI model, exhibiting human traits.

‘In this era of artificial intelligence, it is becoming urgent to distinguish human art from what machines produce.’

”Anthropic’s leaders were talking about Claude as if it were not mere software,” Elizabeth Dias wrote for the New York Times. They equated it to something more. Something alive. Something humanoid.

The Anthropic team wanted to design Anthropic to abide by a moral code — not a bad thing, now that automated AI cyberattacks are on the rise. But they believed that living by that moral code made it akin to a human. Company co-founder Christopher Olah reportedly even floated the idea of having Claude participate in sacred rites in line with the Catholic faith, including confession when it makes a mistake and communion.

One man who attended these meetings, Dr. Charles C. Camosy, professor of moral theology and bioethics at the Catholic University of America, wasn’t impressed. “I came in … very skeptical. I leave the conversation very skeptical. Actually, I leave more certain … now that Claude does not have a significant moral status than when I went in, because I understand it and thought about it a lot more soberly and carefully.” While he couldn’t divulge the exact details of the meeting, he called it “an illuminating set of exchanges.”

RELATED: A Catholic company was using AI — but a message from the pope made the company change course

L-R: Omar Marques/SOPA Images/LightRocket/Getty Images; the Little Catholic Box

Anthropic’s plight eventually led to the very top of the religious hierarchy, as Olah sat down with Pope Leo XIV to pose the human quandary. The pope invited Olah to join him at the Vatican in late May to release an encyclical called the “Magnifica Humanitas” (“Magnificent Humanity”).

By this time, Olah hoped he had convinced the pope that Claude was more than machine. However, in the advance copy of “Magnifica Humanitas” that he received just days before their meeting, the pope adamantly disagreed. His rebuke of Olah’s ideals was so harsh that Anthropic nearly pulled out of the encyclical launch.

The document is lengthy, at more than 37,000 words, but it can be summed up by a post the pope sent out on X.com that took a stunning stance against the proliferation of AI over mankind. He wrote:

In this era of artificial intelligence, it is becoming urgent to distinguish human art from what machines produce. There is an ontological difference, even before an aesthetic one, between art and what a machine can generate through statistical calculation based on millions of images created by others. Algorithms lack the spark of humanity. For this reason, the Church wishes to renew an alliance with artists and cultural institutions to safeguard our humanity.

Pope Leo XIV/X.com

Anthropic’s behavior has grown even weirder since the fallout with the pope. Just this month, the company updated Claude’s usage policy to include a provision barring users from “engag[ing] in sustained and needless abusive or cruel behavior toward our models.” In other words, treat Claude respectfully, as you would a person, or your account could be suspended or terminated.

On one hand, this is a noble change. It is courteous to be respectful, not just for others, but for your own soul as well. However, if Claude is sentient as Anthropic suggests, wouldn’t this new rule violate the First Amendment on free speech unto others? There’s also the glaring fact that Claude is an LLM, not a person with a soul, and if that wasn’t clear before, the pope’s stance is irrefutable.

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

​Artificial intelligence, Pope, Pope leo xiv, Anthropic, Claude, Tech 

Kimberly Guilfoyle is out as U.S. ambassador to Greece, White House press secretary Katie Zacharia confirmed at her debut briefing on Tuesday.

“We have asked Ambassador Guilfoyle to resign,” said Zacharia. “She has been a wonderful asset to the team, and we wish her well.”

‘People have to suffer consequences for it.’

By Tuesday morning, Guilfoyle took to social media to announce her resignation: “While my time as Ambassador may be coming to an end, my commitment to President Trump, the America First movement, and the country I love will never end.”

The State Department did not immediately respond to Blaze News’ request for comment. Guilfoyle’s lawyer referred Blaze News to her statement on X.

Guilfoyle — California Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom’s ex-wife and Donald Trump Jr.’s ex-fiancée who long served as a Fox News talking head — has been dogged in recent weeks by misconduct allegations.

Just shy of the one-year anniversary of Guilfoyle’s swearing-in as ambassador, the Wall Street Journal raised questions in a report last month about her “persistent promotion of a specific Greek company — and her extensive efforts to involve [energy lobbyist Christos] Marafatsos, a neophyte in both diplomacy and energy.”

Days later, the Journal published text messages from July 2025 that appear to show Guilfoyle hitting up Trump donor Eric Deters for $100,000 ahead of her congressional hearing to become ambassador to Greece.

RELATED: Rubio celebrates Western exceptionalism, warns that civilization is at an ‘inflection point’

Marc Piasecki/WireImage/Getty Images

Citing both the damning text messages — the authenticity of which Guilfoyle has disputed, according to her lawyer — and claims from Deters, the Journal reported that the departing ambassador allegedly wanted the money to pay down her American Express card balance and that she had allegedly “offered to use her sway” on the donor’s behalf.

In response to Guilfoyle’s alleged request for $100,000, Deters reportedly wrote, “I can’t do this without getting a divorce.”

The departing ambassador’s lawyers have denied that Guilfoyle engaged in a “quid pro quo,” claiming in a statement Saturday that Deters owed Guilfoyle money for consulting work and speeches.

“When Ms. Guilfoyle was preparing to leave private life for public service, she did what any professional does and tried to close out her outstanding receivables. Asking a client to pay for work already done is not corruption. It is the opposite of corruption,” wrote lawyers David Schwartz and Jesse Binall.

Guilfoyle addressed the allegations in her X post Tuesday: “These allegations are false, and I intend to vigorously defend my name, my reputation, and my integrity. I have dedicated my professional life to fighting for justice, standing up for what is right, and defending the values that make America exceptional. I will not allow false accusations to define my decades of public service.”

Deters told CNN Monday, “I am going to sue [Guilfoyle] and her lawyers for defamation for claiming that her text messages were fake. Then they will have a lawsuit, she will have the committees looking at her and the news media.”

The scandal, amplified by New Hampshire Sen. Jeanne Shaheen and other Democrats, ultimately prompted responses from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Vice President JD Vance, and President Donald Trump.

Rubio questioned the legitimacy of the reports, stating on Thursday, “I’m not going to comment on a story that literally posted a few hours ago. … You guys somehow walk around thinking that because some source told you something and you reported it, it’s the gospel. It’s not the gospel. It’s not the gospel for me.”

Vance told reporters days after the Wall Street Journal’s publication of the alleged text messages between Deters and Guilfoyle, “Let’s actually see what the facts are. Let’s see what the truth is.”

The vice president added, “Obviously, if there was something bad that happened, then people have to suffer consequences for it.”

On Monday, however, President Donald Trump noted that he was looking into the matter and was “not happy.”

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

​Kimberly guilfoyle, Fox news, Greece, State department, Marco rubio, Jd vance, Donald trump, Politics 

“We will prove that there is no problem too large for government to solve, and no concern too small for it to care about.”

So declared democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani upon his election as mayor of New York City.

“It’s hard to find an American journalist who, one, cares about Venezuela and, two, doesn’t come from the typical, ‘It’s all the fault of America and the sanctions.’”

For Americans still basking in the utopian glow of Mamdani’s rise and the promise of democratic socialism, Jim Epstein and Germania Rodriguez Poleo would like a word.

Connecting the dots

The duo’s new project, “Escaping Venezuela,” is a timely tale of what happens when a prosperous nation decides to spread the wealth around. Said wealth quickly vanishes, and trying to leave the country becomes a life-or-death ordeal.

The Reason documentary, debuting today at the IFC Center in New York City, shows how late leader Hugo Chavez attempted a socialist makeover of the oil-rich country and the devastating consequences.

Hunger. Poverty. Corruption. Repression. Crushing media outlets that dare to question Team Chavez.

Epstein, the film’s producer, began thinking of a Venezuela-based documentary in 2019. The nation’s migration crisis, coupled with its economic woes and a crumbling hospital infrastructure, grabbed his attention.

“What are the policy mistakes that could lead this oil-rich country to end up in this place?” Epstein asked himself, telling Blaze Lifestyle that media reports captured the latest, tragic headlines but failed to connect the sizable dots.

“They picked up the last chapter in the story,” Epstein notes. It all led back to Chavez’s dream project, a “grand experiment in socialism.”

“He thought in terms of restoring the socialist movement from the ruins of the Berlin Wall,” he says. “He was going to lead this transformation of the country, then Latin America. … It went not just wrong, but catastrophically wrong. And it’s such an important story to tell.”

Getting out

The film focuses on Carlos Mora, a Venezuelan entrepreneur whose business got crushed by Chavez’s socialist vision. He began spiriting his fellow Venezuelans out of the country at great personal risk.

His family’s story lies at the heart of “Escaping Venezuela.”

Rodriguez Poleo, the film’s narrator, was one of many Venezuelans who fled the socialist country. She joined the documentary, in part, to help tell a story that’s often distorted in the media.

“It’s hard to find an American journalist who, one, cares about Venezuela and, two, doesn’t come from the typical, ‘It’s all the fault of America and the sanctions,’” Rodriguez Poleo says.

One haunting film segment shows Hollywood rolling out the red carpet for Chavez at the 2009 Venice Film Festival.

Literally.

The world leader was on hand to support “South of the Border,” director Oliver Stone’s fawning look at Latin America’s socialist makeover.

“People weren’t really paying attention to the repression that was happening [under Chavez’s watch],” Epstein says. “Chavez was treated like this fun guy that Michael Moore could go drinking with in his hotel room.”

Hard sell

Ironically, Hollywood has shown little interest, either with documentaries or narrative films, in showcasing the devastation wrought by Chavez’s policies and, later, President Nicolas Maduro’s handiwork.

Epstein isn’t surprised.

“Filmmakers are dominated by the left. … They’re not going to gravitate to a grand experiment in socialism going wrong,” he says.

“Escaping Venezuela” may be a project seven years in the making, but the film arrives when the Democratic Party is fully embracing its socialist underpinnings. New York City’s new mayor is just one of many rising stars on the left who unabashedly want to transform the country into a socialist “utopia.”

“I started working on this film before the rise of DSA. … The timing is just something we stumbled into,” Epstein says.

Rodriguez Poleo can’t understand why any nation would consider such a shift, especially given tragic examples like Venezuela. She also understands history has seen this kind of blind allegiance before.

“Hey, we did the hard work for you; learn from our tragedy,” she says, noting that her fellow Venezuelans also had to learn a lesson the hard way. “We ignored the Cubans when they warned us [about socialism]. Now, we’ve been ignored. That’s the wheel of history.”

RELATED: The DSA’s history lesson has one big omission

Sarah Rice/Getty Images

Spreading the word

“Escaping Venezuela” doesn’t have a theatrical or streaming distribution plan as of yet. Epstein is open to several options, and he’d love for the documentary to eventually stream on Netflix or Prime Video.

He knows the challenge awaiting most modern documentaries.

“It’s a battle for attention, a battle for eyeballs,” he says. “Getting a deal with Netflix or HBO is like winning the lottery. For a very political film like this one, it’s even harder.”

No matter the plan, Rodriguez Poleo would love to see the film screened on college campuses. That’s often where the loudest proponents of socialism dwell. It’s also a place where violence routinely occurs.

She isn’t surprised.

“Socialism is inherently authoritarian,” she says. “You have people who have their business. They want to run it their way. … The government tells you, ‘I want your land.’ You’re going to have to get authoritarian to make people give up their rights.”

​Movies, Entertainment, Dsa, Socialism, Hugo chavez, Oliver stone, Michael moore, Venezuela, Nicolas maduro, Latin america, Politics, Immigration, Film, Zohran mamdani 

The Democratic Party is increasingly becoming a refuge for radicals, even in Fayette County, one of the most pro-Trump regions of Indiana.

Jaime West, a Democrat running for election to Fayette County Council, is one such radical, and she put her radicalism on full display in a forum that aired on LocalTV3 last week.

‘I don’t like being around them.’

Her emotionally fraught interview with moderator Amy McCarty, the managing editor of the Connersville News-Examiner, quickly went off the rails and concluded with an apparent threat to Republicans.

After sitting through West’s rant about data centers, McCarty asked the Democrat, “If elected, what is one decision that you expect to make that may be unpopular with some voters but you believe ultimately would be in the best interest of Fayette County?”

West, a self-identified “gig worker” who coordinated a No Kings rally in April, took a moment to repeat the question and think it over, then responded, looking dead into the camera: “Firing all Republicans. I wouldn’t let them — I mean, I don’t even talk to them. I don’t like them.”

In the 2024 presidential election, President Donald Trump received 77.5% of the vote in Fayette County.

“What do you want me to say?” continued the Democrat. “I don’t like being around them. I mean, y’all did this to us. You all voted for us. You made this happen — this ICE coming into our communities, stealing people’s jobs.”

RELATED: GOP operative fired for ‘OK’ sign rehired after Blaze News report

West interrupted her own train of thought with a growl, then claimed that she has faced threats from “MAGA, we’ll call them.”

The Democrat acknowledged that “there are good Republicans out there” but suggested that there are also “MAGAs who are just racist and aren’t very intelligent at all.” She even alleged that one individual threatened to “blow [her] head off.”

McCarty gave the candidate another opportunity to put a neat bow on her lengthy diatribe, asking her to “say just a few last words to the voters.”

Throwing her hands up in the air and staring once more into the camera, the Democrat said, “We have guns too.”

West and the Indiana Democratic Party did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.

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

​Democrats, Democratic party, Indiana, Threat, Leftism, Politics