Category: blaze media

New York serial killer Rex Heuermann will die in prison after being sentenced to multiple life terms without parole for killing seven women and admitting to murdering an eighth victim. The victims’ heartbroken families appeared in court and castigated the serial killer as a “coward,” a “monster,” and an “ogre.”

Heuermann in April pleaded guilty to three counts of murder in the first degree and four counts of murder in the second degree for the murders of seven women, according to the Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office.

‘You’re a disgusting, small man, if you’re a man at all.’

The DA’s office added that Heuermann admitted “publicly, as part of his allocution, to killing an eighth victim, Karen Vergata” in 1996.

Suffolk County District Attorney Raymond A. Tierney said in a statement that state Supreme Court Justice Timothy P. Mazzei sentenced 62-year-old Heuermann to three consecutive life sentences plus 100 years without the possibility of parole.

Tierney stated:

For the families of these eight young women who have waited decades for this day, your voices have been heard. Rex Heuermann will now serve the rest of his life in prison for taking the lives of your loved ones. None of the success of the Gilgo Beach Task Force would have been possible without your relentless dedication and assistance. You are the reason we do what we do. I also extend my heartfelt thanks to all the talented investigators from the partner agencies in our task force for their amazing work.

NBC News reported that Heuermann was charged with the deaths of 20-year-old Jessica Taylor, 22-year-old Megan Waterman, 24-year-old Melissa Barthelemy, 24-year-old Valerie Mack, 25-year-old Maureen Brainard-Barnes, 27-year-old Amber Costello, and 28-year-old Sandra Costilla.

Grieving family members confronted the serial killer and delivered gut-wrenching victim impact statements during the hearing.

The New York Post reported that Amanda Funderburg — whose sister, Melissa Barthelemy, was strangled to death by Heuermann in 2009 — told the convicted killer: “Look at me while I’m talking.”

“I was forced to live with crippling anxiety, depression, PTSD, and destroyed nervous system constantly staring at my phone,” Funderburg said in court.

According to court documents, Heuermann called and taunted Funderburg’s family with grisly details of Barthelemy’s murder.

Funderburg told the Gilgo Beach serial killer that “several times you had called me from my sister’s phone telling me she was a whore.”

At the time of the murder, Funderburg was only 15 years old.

“I was robbed of my youth, I was robbed of my young adulthood, and I still feel robbed today,” Funderburg said, according to People magazine.

“Do me a favor — save me a spot in hell, because I’ll see you there,” Funderburg proclaimed.

According to NBC News, Funderburg blasted Heuermann as an “ogre,” a “repulsive monster,” and a “demon inside and out.”

Melissa Cann — whose sister Maureen Brainard-Barnes was slain by Heuermann — ripped the killer as a “coward.”

“Rex, I noticed a slight smile,” Cann said in court. “There is no honor in this. You’re a coward who hid behind a mask. You hunted and murdered to satisfy the darkness within you.”

“You are a coward who preyed on vulnerable, innocent women behind a mask, a man without empathy, without a soul, who hunted, tortured, and murdered women,” Cann continued.

Nicolette Brainard-Barnes — Maureen’s daughter — was only 7 years old when her mother was murdered.

“I was a little girl, and I needed my mom,” the distraught daughter said. “Like every sex worker, my mother was an entire human being. You make me sick, and I don’t forgive you.”

PBS noted that Heuermann said he strangled his victims — a number of whom were sex workers — and dismembered some of their bodies.

JoAnn Mack — the adoptive mother of Valerie Mack — said at the hearing, “Justice has been done, but it can’t replace what has been taken. She had dreams, and you took them all away from her.”

Jasmine Robinson — the cousin of Jessica Taylor — said of Heuermann’s sentence, “A million years isn’t enough. Nothing will ever make this right.”

Elizabeth Meserve — the aunt of Megan Waterman — blasted those who profited off “The Gilgo Beach Killer: House of Secrets,” a Peacock documentary about the murders that haunted Long Island for more than three decades.

The Post reported that the series featured exclusive interviews with Heuermann’s ex-wife, Asa Ellerup, and daughter, Victoria Heuermann — and added that they both “were reportedly compensated for participating.”

“These individuals profited from the monstrous acts committed against our loved ones by the demon sitting in this courtroom,” Meserve declared.

“This is the kind of world we live in,” Meserve noted. “A demon tortures and kills our loved ones, and his family gets filthy rich off his crimes.”

RELATED: Alleged border-hopping black widow who drugged, robbed, and killed older men she met on dating apps faces extradition: FBI

Heuermann told the court, “There are no words that I can say. The words I would say have no meaning.”

Judge Mazzei slammed the serial killer, “You’re a disgusting, small man, if you’re a man at all. And you’re a coward.”

The judge then ordered, “Get him out of here,” which elicited cheers from the distraught family members.

The Guardian reported that Heuermann’s ex-wife, Asa Ellerup, did not attend the sentencing hearing “out of respect for those who endured unimaginable loss and suffering.”

Her attorney said, “She does not wish her presence to distract from the purpose of these proceedings.”

Court documents said the gruesome murders took place between 1993 and 2010, but authorities didn’t get their big break in the case until several years later.

NBC News reported that Heuermann was arrested in 2023 “based on a trove of evidence, including DNA traces from a discarded pizza crust found in a midtown Manhattan garbage can.”

PBS reported that investigators gathered cellphone and tracking data showing Heuermann arranged meetings with some victims shortly before their disappearances. After Heuermann’s arrest, PBS said prosecutors recovered a “blueprint” for the killings from his computer files.

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

​Crime, Long island, Murder, New york, New york crime, Rex heuermann, Sentence, Serial killer 

You can’t accuse director Uwe Boll of having thin skin.

Film critics have been brutal to the German filmmaker behind “Rampage,” “House of the Dead,” and “Postal.” He once challenged his harshest critics to a boxing match to settle the score.

‘If I have six neo-Nazis raping a migrant girl, there would be no issues. Unfortunately, the criminal statistics show the [opposite].’

He knows he’ll never be an awards season darling, so when a reviewer dubbed him a “right-wing fascist” over his latest film, he shook it off like a glancing uppercut.

He saw those comments coming a mile away.

Culture war TKO

Even by Boll’s pugnacious standards, “Citizen Vigilante” is a culture war TKO. Armie Hammer, working his way back after personal revelations crushed his career, stars as a man fed up with migrant violence in Europe.

So he decides to do something about it. Think “Death Wish” with an agenda no Hollywood studio would touch.

Boll tells Blaze Lifestyle the aforementioned reviewer has every right to dislike “Citizen Vigilante,” out in the U.S. today, but he takes issue with that political slam.

“What is right-wing in saying rapists should not get off the hook?” Boll asked. Critics of unfettered illegal immigration point to high-profile cases where violent migrant offenders were spared harsh sentences.

Pardoning predators

The zeitgeist is in Boll’s corner in more ways than one.

“Citizen Vigilante” arrives days after a shocking U.K. rape gang inquiry report detailed chronic abuse across Great Britain. Migrant crime isn’t relegated to the U.K., an issue Boll explores in his violent, politically incorrect film.

For Boll, hearing stories of sexual predators getting slaps on the wrist proved bad enough. Reading reports of judges excusing the violence based on a perpetrator’s brutal youth enraged him.

“Newspapers called them poor, traumatized people who grew up with violence … but who gives a s**t? … Maybe they’re traumatized. Why are we importing them?” he asked.

“I have nothing against migrants — if they follow the rules and the law,” he added, accusing European news outlets of diminishing statistics tied to migrant crime.

“I have no words for it. … It’s the most absurd thing in my lifetime,” the 60-year-old filmmaker said.

RELATED: ‘Weekend at Biden’s’ creator takes on LA mayor Karen Bass

swiftboatproject.com/x.com/weekend_bidens

Unflinching violence

“Citizen Vigilante” lets Boll respond to those heartbreaking news stories sans filter. Hammer’s character seeks justice when the courts fail to dole out what he thinks is sufficient punishment.

The on-screen violence is unflinching.

“It’s the only movie out there that shows brutally the situation,” he said, noting that he included a shocking murder in the film’s opening scene to highlight the security concerns citizens face.

He’s also angry that his home country refused to rate his film and, more recently, banned it from theaters for allegedly promoting vigilante behavior. The ratings decision boils down to politics, he alleged.

“If I have six neo-Nazis raping a migrant girl, there would be no issues. Unfortunately, the criminal statistics show the [opposite],” he said.

He said he appealed the ratings decision to three separate guilds — directors, writers, and producers.

“I’m a member for 30 years. … Nobody even answered. Dead silence,” he said.

As for promoting violence, Boll said the film’s context drew his homeland’s ire, not the on-screen mayhem.

“Any Jason Statham movie would incite violence [too],” he argued, noting the action star’s penchant for heroes who take the law into their own hands.

“If [British Prime Minister] Keir Starmer sees [“Citizen Vigilante”] he will maybe put an arrest warrant out on me,” Boll said, perhaps tongue in cheek. Perhaps not.

Boll’s blacklist

Germany’s banishment wasn’t the only obstacle he faced while preparing “Citizen Vigilante” for its theatrical run. The film’s director of photography refused to be credited on the project, saying it might cost him future jobs.

Boll said Croatian officials offered him tax rebates to shoot “Citizen Vigilante” in the country, but the rebates were rescinded mid-production.

Hollywood has been abuzz with talk of free speech and alleged censorship by the Trump administration. Boll said he hasn’t gotten support from any Hollywood artists, and his fellow citizens aren’t much better.

“In Germany they’re all hanging onto [film] subsidies. … They’re all very careful,” he said, noting that a few actors reached out privately.

“You’re totally right, but don’t name me,” he recalled of their messages.

Blind casting

Boll isn’t just critical of the migration issue. He’s that rare storyteller who doesn’t pledge allegiance to DEI policies in the arts.

“I cast the way I should cast, not like I need X amount of Asians or X amount of blacks. … I hire people based on their qualifications, … not based if you’re a lesbian transgender Asian. … That’s how it has to be.”

Hammer’s character in “Citizen Vigilante” may reflect a cinematic antihero that dates back to Clint Eastwood’s “Dirty Harry” days in the early 1970s. Boll had little interest in deifying his film’s judge, jury, and executioner.

“He’s not this white knight guy. … He’s a loner. He’s also able to do the actions he’s doing … to execute them properly. … That’s a more realistic approach,” he said. “Audiences should discuss it for themselves. … Is he going too far?”

​Lifestyle, Movies, Uwe boll, Immigration, Migrant, Hollywood, Entertainment, Interview 

An elderly man who uses a walker — but still has plenty of grit left in him — fought back in brutal fashion when a much younger male unleashed an attack on him with a wrench Thursday in Fresno, California.

The incident occurred on San Ramon Avenue near 4th Street just before 9 a.m., KFSN-TV reported.

‘Self defense. I have a small custom-made machete. One can protect oneself by any means — fist, [knife], gun.’

Police told the station a 45-year-old male with a wrench approached a 65-year-old man using a walker.

Authorities told KFSN the younger male hit the older man with the wrench multiple times before the victim eventually used his walker as self-defense.

Fresno Police Sgt. Diana Trueba Vega told the Fresno Bee that the victim said the male with the wrench was acting erratically — possibly while under the influence — prior to allegedly striking him in the hands with the tool.

The older man then pulled a knife out of his walker and stabbed the suspect in the arm and chest, the station said.

Authorities told KFSN the suspect ran off before being taken into custody; he’s being treated at Community Regional Medical Center. Police told the Bee the suspect was listed in stable condition.

Once medically cleared, the suspect will be booked into the Fresno County Jail, the station said. Police told the Bee he’ll be booked on an assault charge and an outstanding warrant.

Police told KFSN the elderly man acted out of self-defense.

RELATED: Intruder allegedly breaks into Florida home, threatens mother and her children, refuses to leave — but victim has her gun

Image source: Fresno (Calif.) Police Department

Those reacting to the station’s Facebook post about the incident seemed pleased the elderly victim came out on top:

“I’ll buy the man a new knife,” one commenter wrote. “Good job, sir.””That sounds awesome,” another user said. “Glad he had that knife on deck.””Self defense,” another commenter noted. “I have a small custom-made machete. One can protect oneself by any means — fist, [knife], gun.”

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

​Arrest, California, Elderly victim, Fighting back, Fresno, Physical attack, Police, Self-defense, Walker, Wrench, Crime 

Just months after integrating customers into its massive AI user base, Microsoft is walking back its promise of being the “everyday productivity app for work and life.”

That is, of course, unless businesses are willing to pay.

‘… it is not possible to offer Cowork as an unlimited service.’

In January, Microsoft quickly turned its customer base of more than 430 million paid users of Microsoft 365 into AI users by combining its Office Suite with its Copilot AI.

“The Microsoft 365 Copilot app is your everyday productivity app for work and life that helps you find and edit files, scan documents, and create content on the go,” the company said at the time.

It seems, however, that Microsoft has realized what many companies have: Unfettered AI usage is awfully expensive. Therefore the Bill Gates brand says it will start charging companies using Copilot’s Cowork feature based on how much they use.

Microsoft already charges and arm and a leg for its Microsoft 365 Business platforms, with prices ranging from $1,500 per year ($12.50 per person) for its standard version to $2,640 per year ($22 per person) for 10 business licenses, for example.

According to a new report by Axios, Microsoft will charge companies that use Copilot Cowork based on usage. Cowork is an AI service that “sends emails, schedules meetings, creates documents,” and manages the user’s calendar.

Charles Lamanna, Microsoft’s executive VP for Copilot, told Axios that it is not possible to offer Cowork as an unlimited service.

RELATED: Top companies admit humans cost less than AI — but still want more bots

Katelyn Mulcahy/Getty Images

“We have users who do hundreds of tasks a week, which is great — they’re way productive — but the consequence is the costs can go very high,” Lamanna said.

Instead, Microsoft is considering offering a version of DeepSeek, a Chinese AI program, at a lesser price. Axios reported that the model would be offered as a lower-cost alternative that is fully hosted on Azure, Microsoft’s cloud platform.

However, since DeepSeek typically withholds user data in China, the Microsoft version would keep user data in Western hands by storing it on its own service.

RELATED: Sick of Microsoft’s preinstalled propaganda on your PC? Block it now.

Omar Marques/SOPA Images/LightRocket/Getty Images

Blaze News previously reported on large companies that were starting to understand the full cost of using metered AI services.

For example, Uber reportedly used up its entire 2026 budget for AI in just four months.

At the beginning of June, a report circulated from an AI consultant that said one company he worked with racked up around $500 million in AI usage in just one month.

AI pricing structures vary, but costs pile up when employees are encouraged to integrate AI into workflow, such as when making large documents.

Anthropic’s Claude may charge just under $5 to produce around 1,000 average-sized images, but dollar signs stack when using the AI for coding or for large documents that charge based on tokens. For Claude, one token is equal to approximately four written characters in English text or “0.75 words.”

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

​News, Microsoft, Artificial intelligence, Copilot, Tech 

On the eve of the Juneteenth observance, it was reported that several Confederate statues, which were removed almost a decade ago, have made a quiet return to Baltimore, Maryland.

The Baltimore Sun reported Thursday that four Confederate statues have made their return to the city, but many details remain unknown.

‘They are being stored in a secure facility. We will not be disclosing their location.’

The statues, which were taken down before dawn on August 16, 2017, just days after the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, were most recently stored in California. They were on display at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles.

Just after the statues were pulled from their pedestals, they were stored for years in a Baltimore impound lot, during which time vandals cost tens of thousands of dollars’ worth of damage to the collection.

RELATED: Baltimore nonprofit that was run by mayor’s wife shut down after getting $100K of taxpayer cash — and Soros is involved

Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott Nathan Howard/Getty Images

The statues are: the statue of Confederate Generals Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson that originally stood outside Wyman Park Dell, the Confederate Soldiers and Sailors Monument that stood on Mount Royal Avenue, the Confederate Women’s Monument, and the Roger B. Taney Monument.

The Confederate Soldiers and Sailors Monument sustained the most damage during the storage period after vandals “chopped off an arm and a Confederate flag and doused the whole thing with bright red paint,” according to the Sun.

But now, officials have confirmed that the statues have been returned to their original city, though questions remain.

“The Confederate monuments are back in Baltimore,” Lauren Schiszik, executive director of the city Commission for Historical and Architectural Preservation, told commissioners during a June 9 briefing session, according to the Baltimore Sun.

“They are being stored in a secure facility. We will not be disclosing their location.”

Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott (D) has been at the forefront of the removal efforts since before they were taken down by his predecessor Mayor Catherine Pugh (D).

Scott has consistently held that these statues and those like them have “ties to the dark side of America’s past.”

In a resolution at the time, then-Councilman Scott wrote, “Monuments with ties to the dark side of America’s past have come under increased scrutiny in recent years with cities across the country debating on whether they should be removed. Following the acts of domestic terrorism carried out by white supremacist terrorist groups in Charlottesville, Virginia, this past weekend cities must act decisively and immediately by removing these monuments. Baltimore has had more than enough time to think on the issue — it’s time to act.”

Scott’s press office did not 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!

​Robert e lee, Stonewall jackson, Politics, Baltimore, Confederacy, Maryland, Brandon scott 

Damon Packard’s movie diary

Damon Packard is the Los Angeles-based filmmaker behind such underground classics as “Reflections of Evil,” “The Untitled Star Wars Mockumentary,” “Foxfur,” and “Fatal Pulse.” His AI-generated work recently appeared as interstitials for the 18th annual American Cinematheque Horrorthon and can be enjoyed on his YouTube channel. After a long day making movies or otherwise making ends meet, he likes to unwind with late-night excursions to the multiplexes and art house cinemas of greater Los Angeles.

May 20, “Obsession” (d. Curry Barker), AMC Century City 15

This movie is exactly the kind of hollow, dystopian misery porn that brainless contemporary culture keeps walloping with praise. I found it tedious, annoying, and dull.

I know this has nothing whatsoever to do with De Palma’s “Obsession,” but at least DePalma’s film (and its inspiration, Hitchcock’s “Vertigo”) knew how to seduce you with mood and atmosphere, mystery and romance. I’ll take a single dreamy close-up of Genevieve Bujold in soft diffusion filters over an hour of a possessed, shrieking, creepy, clingy girlfriend.

At some point in the last act, there was a lot of screaming and noise in the theater, and they shut the film off because someone had a seizure or something. So I was spared suffering through the rest.

As I left, I heard Bernard Herrmann’s music in my head. I watched the paramedics arrive. They all looked jaded and took their time pushing the gurney into the elevator. I walked past the huge “The Mandalorian and Grogu” forest planet display they have out front of the AMC Century City, and Herrmann’s music seemed to keep following me.

And then I saw her. A Geneviève Bujold look-alike drifting silently past the Funko Pop claw machines in a cream-colored coat, soft curls glowing under the multiplex exterior lights. She turned slightly, just enough for me to catch the resemblance, and then vanished onto the escalator like the ending of a forgotten De Palma dream.

May 29, “Backrooms” (d. Kane Parsons), AMC Century City 15

You know you’re in trouble when the first two minutes are instant boredom and the rest doesn’t get any better. Yeesh, what a waste — ultimately an endurance test to get through. Not a single interesting moment or idea.

I like that actor Chiwetel Ejiofor, but what the hell is he doing in this? Not only is he miscast, but he’s above this kind of tripe.

When I hear them praising ‘Disclosure Day,’ I’m like George C. Scott in ‘Hardcore’ when he finds out his daughter has been abducted into the porn industry.

I would have hoped a 20-year-old boy-wonder director would bring the reckless energy to make something at least half watchable, but nope, just as horrible, bland, lifeless, dull, and dumb as every other thing the clueless moron masses who wouldn’t know what a good film was if their life depended on it flock to.

Sam Raimi was 21 when he made “Evil Dead”; Steven Spielberg 24 when he made “Duel”; Orson Welles 25 when he made “Citizen Kane”; Bernardo Bertolucci 22 when he made “Before the Revolution”; Louis Malle 23 when he made “Elevator to the Gallows.” Now THOSE were great films.

Spielberg is now 79, and “Disclosure Day” looks like a bland, generic, insipid pile of direct-to-Tubi junk. But is it really age and vitality, or is it that nobody can write good stories any more? Or that nobody would finance one if it even existed?

RELATED: Mission: Impossible (to sit through); Final Dud-stination; RIP Joe Don Baker

Mike Malloy/Damon Packard/Cinerama/Manuel Velasquez/Getty Images

June 2, “Pressure” (d. Anthony Maras), AMC Century City 15

Just when you thought every WW2 story had been exhausted over the last 80 years, along comes this little $5 million production set within a world of dueling weathermen!

What immediately sounds like mundane, made-for-cable fodder turns out to be a surprisingly terrific and engaging little movie, with an interesting perspective and new take.

Mostly due to the things you rarely see in films these days: good writing, good music, good direction, and interesting characters. Superb performances and casting all around, even for the initially perceived as a terribly miscast Brendan Fraser, who gives it his all and wins you over in the end. Special mention to the lovely Irish actress Kerry Condon, who makes a perfect 40s military babe.

Nothing phenomenal, but as far as mainstream theatrical releases, it is one of the best I’ve seen this year so far and a reminder some people still know how to make proper films (even if they are shot on the Arri Alexa 35 and technically shouldn’t be called “films”).

June 6, “The Doors” (1991, d. Oliver Stone), Vista Theater Hollywood

Caught a late show in 70mm last night. Which looked beautiful but seemed to be missing the subwoofer channel or something. The sound was all high and mid frequencies, zero low end. Not sure what the deal was there, a print issue or something not switched on? A projectionist might know the answer.

I really like this film, and it always brings back certain feelings and memories of sneaking onto the set with my friend Chad and joining the background actors at 3 a.m. at the Whiskey back in 1990. The cult worship of Morrison is not dead; there were girls screaming in the theater. The Vista still has a bag-checking policy; therefore I always make it a point to sneak in food and drink just on principle

June 12, “Disclosure Day” (d. Steven Spielberg), AMC Burbank 16

Caught a nice and empty 11:30 p.m. showing of “Disclosure Day” last night. Talk about a moronic, bland snoozefest. The latest major mega-embarrassment from an aging cine-Boomer. So incredibly dumb, dull, and out of touch that you just sit there half awake in a stunned stupor, taking it all in while trying to stay awake.

How anyone can actually defend this is beyond me. It never ceases to amaze: No matter how awful some new mainstream pile of garbage is, there are plenty of defenders — people (clueless, brain-dead walking software programs) who have zero proper film knowledge or education or interest and wouldn’t know one way or the other.

When I hear them praising something like “Disclosure Day,” I’m like George C Scott in “Hardcore” when he finds out his daughter has been abducted into the porn industry. Oh, never mind, that’s another film and actor you’ve probably never heard of.

The John Williams score is good. Spielberg may not have it any more, but Williams still does.

June 17, “The Furious” (d. Kenji Tanigaki), AMC Marina Marketplace 6

Caught a late show of this this mostly pretty darned awesome and entertaining Hong Kong action film.

It feels very much like the kind of creative (and at times goofy and hilarious) Hong Kong martial arts exploitation films we were getting in the 1980s. With a lot more blood and violence.

Top-notch fight scenes, even if they get a little overlong in the third act (which is typical). American action movies that borrow from Hong Kong can never come close to the real deal, and this here is seventh-generation Asian action fight choreography done right.

The AI lip sync is a completely flawless and amazing tool, for those who have never seen it. (I’m pretty sure with all the idiotic knee-jerk AI hatred right now, they don’t want people to know they’re using it, even though it’s impossible to tell.)

Only wish I saw this in a better theater instead one of the few non-upgraded multiplexes in this area, with muddy images and weak sound. It’s stuff like THIS that should be dominating the premium screens.

Still, I’m grateful we get little surprises like this in an otherwise predictable world.

​Damon packard’s movie diary, Lifestyle, Movies, Entertainment, Steven spielberg, Disclosure day, Reviews 

As a philosophy professor at a state university, I am surrounded by activist professors who use their classrooms to push DEI, LGBTQ, and decolonization agendas. They justify this by saying they pursue justice — one of the highest goals of education.

But America can remember chattel slavery as evil only because justice is not invented by activists, courts, or governments. Justice is grounded in the nature of man and the law of God.

Juneteenth reminds us that legal freedom came late to Texas. But the truth about human dignity was not late. It was there from creation.

Because of our founding ideals, Americans could fight to end slavery as an evil and a violation of natural law. And because many nations are governed by different ideas, slavery still persists in parts of the world today.

Juneteenth is not merely a celebration of delayed legal emancipation. It bears witness to a deeper truth: Chattel slavery was wrong before government finally acted against it. Moral law stands above human law. If America is going to remember Juneteenth truthfully, it must recover natural law and the Creator who grounds it.

Freedom did not create dignity

On June 19, 1865, enslaved people in Texas finally heard that they were free. The announcement did not create their dignity. It did not make them human. It did not suddenly endow them with rights. It publicly recognized what had already been true by nature: They were human beings made by God, and no man had the right to own them.

The tyrannical system that allowed slavery began in kidnapping and was propagated by brutal violence. Its laws were no laws at all because they violated the natural moral law given by God to all humanity.

Americans agree today that slavery was wrong. But why?

It was not wrong merely because Congress later acted against it. It was not wrong merely because public opinion changed. It was not wrong merely because the Union won the war. It was not wrong because history moved forward.

Slavery was wrong because human beings are not property.

Human beings have a nature that gives them a moral status no government creates. They are rational, moral, embodied persons made for duties before God and neighbor. Because of what man is, certain things cannot rightly be done to him.

That is Christian natural law reasoning.

Rights come from the Creator

Natural law begins with the insight that the good for a being is grounded in the nature of that being. The good for a horse is grounded in the nature of a horse. The good for a tree is grounded in the nature of a tree. The good for a human being is grounded in human nature.

This is why chattel slavery is not merely inefficient, outdated, or offensive. It is contrary to what a human being is.

A slaveholder may have legal power, social approval, economic incentives, and the capacity for tyrannical violence. But he does not have moral authority, because no human law can erase the nature of man.

RELATED: Why I won’t celebrate Juneteenth as a federal holiday

Stephen Maturen/Getty Images

The Declaration of Independence does not say rights come from government. It says men are “created equal” and “endowed by their Creator” with “unalienable Rights.”

If rights come from government, government can redefine, restrict, or remove them. If rights come from social consensus, the majority can vote them away. If rights come from personal identity, rights become expressions of will and power.

But if rights come from the Creator, government is under judgment. The state does not create justice. It is accountable to justice.

This is why the Declaration was morally stronger than the compromise that tolerated slavery. The American founding contained a principle that condemned America’s own practice. Juneteenth reminds us that the principle had to be applied against the national sin.

The counterfeit of justice

Social justice activists want the emotional power of moral judgment without the metaphysical foundation that makes moral judgment possible.

They want to say slavery was evil. They want to say racism is evil. They want to say oppression is evil. They want to say injustice is evil.

But many of these same activists reject the Creator, reject fixed human nature, reject moral law, and reduce justice to power, identity, or social construction. The same people who say slavery is wrong also tell us that human beings can redefine themselves as animals, objects, or anything else they imagine. They appeal to the Marxist dialectic of oppressor and oppressed while denying the moral order that makes oppression intelligible.

Their view is incoherent.

If justice is socially constructed, then one society constructs slavery and another constructs abolition. If morality is only the preference of the powerful, abolition is not more just than slavery. It is merely the victory of a different power. If human nature is whatever we decide it is, human dignity has no stable foundation.

Juneteenth cannot be explained by moral relativism. It requires moral realism.

DEI as secularized religion

The activist account of justice is a Marxist counterfeit of Christianity. It keeps some outward forms but denies the inner meaning. DEI programs often speak in the language of justice, oppression, liberation, and equality. But they detach those words from the Creator and natural law. Justice becomes group equity. Sin becomes systemic power. Repentance becomes political re-education. Redemption becomes ideological compliance.

That framework cannot explain why slavery was evil in the first place. It can describe power relations, but it cannot give a final account of why oppressors are morally guilty.

The Christian natural law tradition can.

A right observance of Juneteenth should include gratitude for emancipation, repentance for national sin, honor for those who suffered, and moral clarity about the nature of justice. But it should not become a ritual of permanent grievance or ideological manipulation.

RELATED: Stop trying to segregate the American founding

Carol M. Highsmith/Buyenlarge/Getty Images

America is accountable to God

The lesson is not that America is uniquely evil. The lesson is that America, like every nation, is accountable to a law higher than itself. When America violated that law, it was guilty. When America appealed to that law, it had the moral resources to correct itself.

Americans must repent of national sin and turn to Christ for redemption.

That is why Juneteenth should not be surrendered to radicals who despise the moral order that makes the holiday meaningful.

Juneteenth reminds us that legal freedom came late to Texas. But the truth about human dignity was not late. It was there from creation. The offer of redemption did not come late either. It is extended to all sinners.

The enslaved were human before emancipation. They had rights before government recognized them.

Slavery was evil before it was abolished. Justice was real before America obeyed it.

That is the lesson America needs now. We have national sins for which we must repent, and we must be clear that Christ is our redeemer.

Juneteenth only makes sense if natural law is real. And natural law only makes sense if a Creator’s justice stands above every court, legislature, plantation, university, and activist movement.

Marxist advocates can scream, but they cannot give a coherent account of justice.

​Declaration of independence, Natural law, Opinion & analysis, Unalienable rights, Slavery, Juneteenth, Christianity, Justice, Racism, American founding, Diversity equity inclusion 

A man suspected of attempted murder is already back out on the street in the United Kingdom even though he may have caused a toddler to end up in the crocodile enclosure at a zoo.

On Thursday at Johnsons of Old Hurst zoo, located about 80 miles north of London, a 3-year-old boy somehow ended up in the crocodile enclosure. How exactly he got there remains unclear, but it does not appear to have been an accident.

The man ‘was assessed as not being fit for interview.’

A New York Times headline about the incident said a “man forced” the boy into the crocodile enclosure, though the article noted that “it was not immediately clear whether the boy was thrown” into it.

The BBC reported that at least one crocodile attacked the boy during the harrowing incident and that police have said the crocodiles have not been removed or put down.

Zoo staff rescued the boy, who received medical attention on site before he was transported to the hospital. In a news release Friday morning, the Cambridgeshire Constabulary said he suffered “serious injuries” and that he is in “critical but stable condition.”

Within hours of the incident, a “30-year-old man from Norfolk” had been arrested for attempted murder, a news release from the constabulary indicated.

He was not in custody for long.

In the Friday morning news release update, the constabulary confirmed that the “30-year-old man” had been released on bail until September 18. The news release said the man “was assessed as not being fit for interview.”

The BBC said that individuals in Britain can be deemed unfit for interview on account of their “physical or mental state.”

RELATED: UK officials’ worst fear about horrific near-beheading by African suspect: Racist backlash

GB News reported Friday that the suspect has “learning difficulties” and that he was accompanied by a “carer when the boy was thrown into the enclosure.”

The constabulary confirmed that the man and the boy do not know one another.

“Our enquiries are ongoing as we continue to understand the circumstances surrounding this distressing incident,” said a statement from Det. Insp. Verity McCann.

“Our thoughts remain with the boy, and his family and specialist officers continue to support them through this difficult time.”

The constabulary did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.

In a statement posted to social media on Thursday, Johnsons of Old Hurst said:

Our thoughts and prayers are with the boy and his family following the incident that occurred today.Out of respect to the family, our Tropical House will remain closed until further notice. … The rest of the site will remain open as normal.

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

​United kingdom, London, Bail, Politics 

Supporters of Karmelo Anthony have coined a new dance dubbed the “Austin Bop.” The TikTok trend emerged recently, where participants dance to a rap song by artist 600Notti titled “Austin Bop (stabbing my chest)” by making repeated stabbing/thrusting motions (sometimes using real knives) to mock his 2025 murder by Anthony.

BlazeTV host Jason Whitlock calls it “satanic.”

“This feels spiritual. This feels plotted and calculated,” he said on a recent episode of “Jason Whitlock Harmony.”

Playing multiple clips of Anthony supporters performing the sadistic dance, Whitlock urges his audience to analyze this trend through a “spiritual warfare” lens.

“There is a crisis, a pandemic of satanic behavior, chaotic behavior,” he says, “and I’m sorry, I have to put a color on it because there is a particular color that’s being brainwashed into thinking that violence against white people is justified and violence and conflict about any and everything is justified and normal.”

These are the same people, he argues, who are claiming that Anthony acted rightfully in self-defense by stabbing Metcalf, who was unarmed, for pushing him.

“They need an exorcism,” he declares.

“This is a brain rot and a lunacy … a mental illness, a sickness, a reprobate mind, and a culture that is producing reprobate minds — a culture that has no respect for life,” he continues, enraged.

This participation in and support for objective evil we’re seeing in the black community, he says, is the result of making race one’s core identity.

“We have an anti-white racism problem in America. No one wants to talk about it,” he says.

“Everyone wants to pretend like, ‘No, no, we got black racism. Didn’t you hear? Someone said the N-word someplace and that’s racism.’ No, what racism is is when a child murders another child and based on race, one group says, ‘Well, no, that was actually self-defense, and we need to be merciful and graceful with the child that did the murdering, and we need to mock [the victim] and his family,”’ he rails.

While the escalating violence among young black people is a multifaceted issue, Whitlock places much of the blame on music.

“There is a form of music that escalates conflict, promotes satanic energy, promotes nihilism, promotes violence, unrepentant violence — and it’s called hip-hop,” he says.

“We’re programming kids for their own destruction and for the destruction of this country.”

To hear more, watch the full episode above.

Want more from Jason Whitlock?

To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Jason whitlock, Black culture, Jason whitlock harmony, Austin metcalf, Karmelo anthony 

Vice President JD Vance, whose Friday trip to Switzerland for U.S.-Iran peace talks was postponed owing to another bloody exchange between Israel and Hezbollah, paused to reflect and speak with the host of BlazeTV’s “Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey” this week about the current political moment, where he’s coming from, and where America might be headed.

Besides discussing chicken farming, the need to emulate the enduring hope of Christian martyrs, what Catholics and evangelicals can learn from one another, and what messaging changes the pro-life movement should make to win the “persuasion battle,” Stuckey and the vice president broached the correlated topics of the Iran deal and Israeli influence in American politics.

‘Outsized’ Israeli influence? ‘Israel derangement syndrome’?

Stuckey noted that the right has been roiled by a disagreement — especially in the wake of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk’s assassination — about whether “Israel has an outsized influence in the U.S.”

‘Already, the critics of the deal are being proven wrong.’

Vance, who on Thursday blasted Israeli critics of the U.S.-Iran memorandum of understanding and insinuated that Israel had previously sabotaged the peace process via escalations in Lebanon, told the BlazeTV host, “I certainly think that Israel, like a lot of other countries, tries to influence American politics. I sort of take that as a given.”

The vice president noted further that “American leaders have to be very careful that when we pursue something, we’re doing it for America’s best interest and not for any other country’s best interest,” adding that “it’s just not true” that America’s interests are always aligned with Israel’s — or with the United Kingdom’s, France’s, or any other partner’s interests, for that matter.

Vance cited the ongoing disagreements between President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over how best to bring the Iran war to a close as illustrating the occasional divergence between the two nations’ interests.

RELATED: Trump signs Iran deal, blasts ‘fools’ after meltdowns by Sens. Cruz and Cassidy

Ken Cedeno/AFP/Getty Images

While cognizant that criticism of Israel and Israeli influence sometimes “bleeds into Jew hate” and that “sometimes criticism of the Israeli government can be expressed in a way that’s anti-Semitic,” Vance — who has faced intense criticism by Iran hawks and Israeli officials this week — underscored that it’s just “not the case that every criticism of Bibi Netanyahu’s policy decisions leads to anti-Semitism or is anti-Semitic.”

The vice president identified two “critical mistakes” he perceives advocates for Israel routinely making: first, failing to delineate between American interests and Israeli interests; and second, “always conflating criticism of a particular government with Jew hatred — because if everything is Jew hatred, then nothing is Jew hatred.”

Stuckey generally agreed but highlighted an ideological condition she has observed on the right — which she termed “Israel derangement syndrome” — in which certain critics of Israel attribute all of their problems to the foreign power, its influence, and its people.

Vance affirmed that “both are bad” but suggested he has been “particularly sensitive” in recent days to Israeli influence and criticism of America’s resistance to it because of his defense of Trump’s decision to end the Iran war.

Clarification on the Iran deal

Democrats in Congress, Iran hawks, Israeli officials, and some Republican lawmakers have complained incessantly this week about the Iran deal.

One of the chief concerns raised about the deal is the sixth of the agreement’s 14th points, which states, “The United States of America undertakes with regional partners to develop a definitive, mutually agreed plan with at least $300 billion for the reconstruction and economic development of the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

Vance noted, “It’s not our money.”

A source with direct knowledge of the deal told Reuters that the fund is a private investment vehicle and will not include any government money or grants. Companies around the world have reportedly agreed to commit financing.

President Donald Trump said this week that the U.S. was “not investing; we’re not putting up 10 cents.”

“The biggest misconception, by far, is this idea that the deal has all these benefits to Iran,” Vance told Stuckey. “The underlying way that it’s structured is that they don’t get any of the benefits — not a single thing — unless they perform a change in behavior.”

With their military destroyed, their ability to threaten their neighbors largely diminished, their nuclear program and ability to enrich uranium “gone,” and their economy in shambles, Vance said the Iranians are in a “tough spot.” They now have the choice between getting “quite literally nothing” besides further turmoil — or behaving like “a normal regime,” developing a positive relationship with the U.S., and securing investment from Qataris, Emiratis, and others in the region.

As for whether the deal will bear fruit, Vance cited the resumption of bloodless, toll-free maritime traffic down the Strait of Hormuz over the past few days as a good sign.

“Yesterday, we got more oil out of the Strait of Hormuz than we have at any point since the beginning of the conflict,” said Vance.

“Already, the critics of the deal are being proven wrong in some of what they’re saying that the Iranians have gotten but also what the United States has gotten.”

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

​Allie beth stuckey, Benjamin netanyahu, Influence, Iran, Israel, Israeli, Jd vance, Politics, Relatable, Vice president 

One underreported achievement of President Trump’s first administration was the support the Justice Department provided to religious-liberty litigants.

During those years, the federal government filed statements of interest and friend-of-the-court briefs defending conscience rights at a pace unmatched by either of Trump’s immediate predecessors. Cases involving memorial crosses, conscience protections, ministerial autonomy, and the rights of religious schools all reflected a broader shift in posture from the Obama administration.

Constitutional guarantees are only as durable as the institutions willing to enforce them.

The federal government no longer treated religion merely as a tolerated private exercise. It treated religious liberty as a constitutional good worthy of affirmative protection.

That shift has only strengthened under Trump 47.

At the time, critics dismissed many of the administration’s actions as symbolic or temporary. What looked then like a change in tone now appears to have been the beginning of an institutional realignment.

The Justice Department’s recently released report from the Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias suggests that the second Trump administration intends not merely to defend religious liberty episodically, but to embed those protections throughout the administrative state.

The point is not simply the report’s conclusions, significant as they are. The point is the scope of the undertaking.

Drawing participation from 17 federal agencies, the report catalogs hundreds of pages of examples in which religious Americans — Christians in particular — faced adverse treatment from the federal government because of their views on life, sexuality, education, parental rights, and medical conscience. The report and its 1,200 footnotes present reams of evidence to support its central argument: During the Biden years, religious exercise was often treated less as a constitutional guarantee than as an obstacle to the ideological objectives of a political machine.

A major development of Trump’s second administration has therefore been the construction of infrastructure around religious liberty itself. The White House Faith Office, the Religious Liberty Commission, agency faith liaisons, and now the Task Force to Eliminate Anti-Christian Bias all reflect an effort to institutionalize protections that previously depended too heavily on presidential discretion.

This development is especially visible inside the Justice Department. During the first Trump administration, Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued welcome guidance for federal prosecutors handling religious-liberty matters and established the Place to Worship Initiative to address violence and discrimination directed at houses of worship.

RELATED: Trump’s Justice Department is shining a light on woke universities — finally

Angela Lewis/Bloomberg/Getty Images

The current report builds on that framework. Rather than focusing only on isolated incidents, it argues that anti-Christian bias — and therefore hostility to religious liberty — became embedded in regulatory enforcement itself, especially when religious convictions conflicted with prevailing doctrines on sexuality, gender identity, or pro-life Christian opposition to the progressive sacrament of abortion.

The report points, for example, to enforcement disparities under the FACE Act. Pro-life activists received aggressive federal scrutiny, while attacks against churches and pregnancy resource centers received comparatively limited attention. Even when political pressure left the Biden administration little choice, its enforcement of the FACE Act against actual vandals went only as far as necessary to stem rising public complaint.

The report goes further, identifying conflicts involving military chaplains, foster-care providers, health care workers, religious schools, and federal employees who sought accommodation for sincerely held religious beliefs.

Whether one agrees with every characterization in the report is almost beside the point. The broader constitutional question remains unavoidable: Can government remain neutral toward religion while treating orthodox religious belief as presumptively discriminatory?

Historically, the answer has been no.

Religious liberty in the American tradition has never meant mere freedom of inward belief. The founders protected religious exercise because they understood that belief inevitably shapes action: education, charity, worship, speech, commerce, and public participation. The First Amendment restrains government not because religion is politically useful, but because conscience stands beyond the state’s authority.

That understanding has often been obscured in recent decades by a truncated vision of religious freedom — one that permits worship inside sanctuary walls while treating religious conviction outside those walls as suspect. Many of the conflicts cataloged in the Justice Department report arise from that narrowing impulse. The fight is no longer over whether Americans may privately believe traditional religious teachings, even explicitly Christian ones. The fight is whether they may live according to them publicly.

Judging by this report and other promising signs, the latest version of the Trump administration recognizes this reality more clearly than any administration in modern memory.

Critics argue that these initiatives privilege Christianity or collapse the distinction between church and state. But that has always been their schtick. Trump’s direct confrontation and dismissive rhetoric have exposed many modern assumptions about the “separation of church and state” as political slogans rather than constitutional arguments.

RELATED: 5 countries where Christians face brutal persecution — and how you can help

EMMY IBU/AFP/Getty Images

The more important legal question is whether religious Americans — Christians and all people of faith — may participate fully in public life without surrendering core convictions as the price of admission. This report focuses on bias against a majoritarian religion. But imagine the damage if the state focused its ire on minority faiths. Religious liberty belongs to all Americans.

The administration’s trajectory is unmistakable. The president’s Religious Liberty Commission has been assigned with developing long-term recommendations for protecting religious exercise across education, health care, public funding, parental rights, and federal policy. The Justice Department report, which will continue to expand into 2027, serves as both justification and road map for that effort.

Critics will insist these measures are unnecessary because religious believers already possess constitutional protections. Only a cynic could look at the mountain of evidence in the Justice Department report and claim nothing happened. Those constitutional protections existed during the last administration, too, but we now know that officials chose political ideology over the foundational principles of the First Amendment.

Constitutional guarantees are only as durable as the institutions willing to enforce them.

The most important question, then, is not whether Trump personally embodies religious devotion. He plainly does not fit conventional expectations of religious statesmanship. The more consequential question is whether his administration understands the structural importance of religious liberty within the constitutional order.

Increasingly, the answer appears to be yes.

For religious Americans, Christians in particular, who spent much of the last decade defending themselves against the coercive power of administrative agencies, that distinction matters a great deal.

​Trump, Religious liberty, Federal government, Justice department, White house faith office, Religious liberty commission, First amendment, Christians, Opinion & analysis 

We are halfway into Pride Month, and I have already seen a year’s worth of cringeworthy behavior.

Take the recent viral video from Washington state. A local high school played host to a “drag show,” in which adult men twerked in front of children of all ages in the name of “Pride.”

What we are witnessing in June is no longer about tolerance. It is a full-throated campaign to reach children before they are old enough to think critically.

Not at a bar. Not at an adults-only venue. On a school campus, during a school-sponsored event, in front of kids. Parents who raised concerns were treated like the problem.

From ABC to LGBTQ

Nor is Pride limited to in-person parades or parties. The popular show “Blue’s Clues” — geared toward kids as young as 2 — has aired a Pride “sing-a-long,” featuring anthropomorphic “trans male” beavers with post-op “top surgery” scars. “Sesame Street” also introduces its young viewers to Pride Month, celebrating gay marriage for good measure. Parents who think these programs will help their kids learn to count and spell are in for a rude awakening.

I wish I could say this still surprises me. But it doesn’t — not after decades of watching an ideology inch its way closer and closer to children, first into universities, then high schools, then middle schools, and now into elementary classrooms and summer camps.

I have learned to recognize the pattern. What used to be shocking has become customary. And that normalization is precisely the point.

What we are witnessing in June is no longer about tolerance. It is a full-throated campaign to reach children before they are old enough to think critically about what they’re being told.

‘The girl experience’

Consider what is happening in Girl Scout camps this summer. The organization’s latest Camp Culture Code defines a child’s biological sex as “sex assigned at birth.” Not a gift from God. An assignment. As if the Creator made an error and a stranger in a lab coat had to correct it on his clipboard. This is how they’re talking to 9-year-olds at summer camp.

The code further states that this sex may differ from “how a person understands themselves to be.” Does this mean boys will be at Girl Scout camp? The answer may confuse you:

Our camps serve cisgender girls, gender-expansive youth, non-binary youth, and trans-girls and trans-boys. … We have expanded our understanding of who belongs at Girl Scouts, as well as our commitment to serving all youth who identify with the girl experience.

This is indoctrination, pure and simple — and it has been going on for a long time.

RELATED: ‘Even Elmo has fallen victim’: Sara Gonzales blasts ‘Sesame Street’ for ‘demonic’ Pride propaganda

Blaze Media

Defending God’s design

I know this firsthand, because it was watching exactly this kind of ideological drift that led me and a group of Cincinnati moms to found an alternative to Girl Scouts in 1995. Not because we wanted to shelter our girls from the world, but because we refused to let an organization entrusted with their formation use that trust to push an ideology that contradicted everything we believed to be true about womanhood, biology, and God’s design. We knew our daughters deserved better.

We started with just 10 troops; today, American Heritage Girls has over 70,000 members in all 50 states. That growth reflects tens of thousands of outraged parents who have voted with their feet, choosing an organization that tells girls the truth: that they are created female on purpose, that their femininity is a gift worth celebrating, and that God does not make mistakes.

This summer, we will continue to equip parents, Troop leaders, and faith communities with our Raising Godly Girls Guide to Gender and Identity, specifically to give parents language and tools to help their daughters navigate what has become a relentless ideological assault.

Biblical or bust

Because the hard truth is that if parents don’t arm their kids with a biblical worldview, other adults will be happy to step in with their own way of seeing things.

They will try to pass it off as “education” and label anyone who pushes back as bigoted. But parents speaking out to shield their impressionable young children from half-baked, politically motivated theories about sex deserve support, not scorn.

The moms I talk to across this country are not hateful. They are not afraid of people who are different from themselves. They are simply unwilling to hand their daughters over to a worldview that treats biology as a mistake and childhood as an opportunity for ideological recruitment. The good news is that they are not alone. I will keep speaking up. I hope every parent will, too.

​Lifestyle, Lgbtq, Pride month, Girl scouts, American heritage girls, Drag queens, Culture, Countering ‘pride’ 

Residents of Burlington are demanding answers from police after a gruesome discovery at a foreclosed home purchased at auction.

Connecticut state troopers said in a press release that they were called to the home on Stanwich Lane on Sunday at 4:46 p.m. for a report of human remains found in the home.

‘I’ve never heard of anything like that happening anywhere.’

The homeowner had recently purchased the home “as is” in an auction, according to police.

The remains of three people were found and described to be in a “skeletal” condition. Police said there was no indication of criminal conduct and that an investigation was being conducted by the State Police Western District Major Crime unit.

“This appears to be an isolated incident, and there is no danger to the public at this time,” they added.

Police said they would release updates after the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner determined the manner of death of the trio and their identities.

Neighbors in the area told WKYC-TV they were terrified by the discovery.

“It sounds very scary to see skeletons in a house,” said Vicky Havey, who bikes nearby. “It’s sad. Very sad.”

“I’ve never heard of anything like that happening anywhere that I knew about personally,” Mark Chowaniec said.

RELATED: Suspect in ‘horrific, gruesome’ murder of family in Alabama is Salvadoran gang member and had been deported, police say

A profile of the home on Zillow indicated that the 2,800-square-foot home had been sold in 2019 for $535K and was currently estimated to be worth about $846K.

Video of the home in the WKYC report showed that the front lawn was neglected and overgrown with weeds.

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

​Human remains, Police investigation, Skeletal remains, Foreclosed home, Crime 

Let me tell you about the very rich,” F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote a century ago. “They are different from you and me. They possess and enjoy early, and it does something to them, makes them soft where we are hard, and cynical where we are trustful, in a way that, unless you were born rich, it is very difficult to understand.”

Last week’s SpaceX initial public offering made company founder and CEO Elon Musk the world’s first publicly known trillionaire — very different from all of us, at least on paper.

Bad enough he became too rich. Worse, Elon Musk became too independent.

On paper is doing plenty of heavy lifting. We’ll get back to that.

If billionaires “shouldn’t exist,” as our boring socialist friends never tire of saying, then a trillionaire must be not merely obscene but downright apocalyptic. If the existence of billionaires is a policy failure, the arrival of a trillionaire is a crime scene. Call Congress! Summon the United Nations! Eat the rich!

Let me tell you about the very left-wing. They are different from you and me. They enjoy little, and it does something to them. It makes them covetous where normal people are merely curious, bitter where normal people are merely skeptical, and stupid where the rest of us are trying very hard to be charitable.

Musk’s gargantuan wealth is a test no leftist can pass.

“If we liquidated Elon Musk as a financial entity we could each pocket $3,000,” one frivolous X user wrote. “Just putting that out there. 3K. Not bad.”

“Elon Musk is a trillionaire but it’s def the people on SNAP ruining your life,” a tedious Democratic strategist posted.

“Right? He could fund SNAP himself and still have a boatload left to spare,” a pseudonymous Marxist replied.

This is what happens when resentment collides with arithmetic.

“Elon Musk could easily fund” makes for a terrific party game, especially if everyone playing has skipped high school civics, freshman economics, and the day in third grade when Mrs. Campbell broke the news that Monopoly money was not legal tender.

RELATED: A child’s guide to why billionaires should, in fact, exist

RapidEye/iStock/Getty Images

With $1 trillion, Musk could buy every major carmaker in America, Europe, and Japan. With $1 trillion, Musk could fund global famine relief dozens of times over, provide clean water to the world, rebuild Gaza, or hand every person on earth a modest cash gift. With $1 trillion, Musk could cover the United Nations’ humanitarian appeals, the Australian budget, or — according to my friend Mac Owens — roughly 3.5 miles of Gavin Newsom’s high-speed rail system.

Cool. Put it all on the board. Have fun. Pour another drink. (Maybe pour me one, too.)

But Musk does not have $1 trillion in a checking account. He is not Scrooge McDuck swan-diving into a vault of gold coins (not that it would even work that way). He owns shares in companies that other people believe are valuable because those companies build things, launch things, connect things, sell things, and promise things investors think may be worth a lot more later.

His wealth is not a pile of cash. It is a claim on productive enterprise.

The socialist imagination never really gets past the pile. The left sees wealth and pictures a dragon atop a hoard. It sees equity and imagines stolen bread. It sees a balance sheet and imagines a pantry that can be raided without consequence.

But Musk’s wealth cannot be “liquidated” without destroying much of the value the envious wish to seize. Sell enough shares, and the price falls. Seize the company, and watch the engineers leave. Convert capital into consumption, and the thing that made the wealth possible begins to disappear.

Welcome to Economics 102. Economics 101 teaches scarcity. Economics 102 teaches that capital is not loot.

None of this makes Musk a saint. I don’t know if he is a good man. I don’t know if any man should have as much influence as he has, and neither do his fanboys. Musk is erratic, strange, reckless, sometimes brilliant, and often his own worst enemy. But he is not a political theory. He is not a catechism. He is not your dad.

I know do this much, though: If Musk had not bought Twitter in 2022 for the eye-watering sum of $44 billion, Americans would know less about their own country and less about the people who presume to manage it.

That purchase did not make him richer. It made him more dangerous.

Dangerous to whom? To the people who think “misinformation” means information they cannot control. To governments that prefer pressure campaigns to open censorship. To NGOs that discovered a business model in laundering political speech control through the language of “safety.” To journalists who miss the days when a few institutions could decide which scandals were real and which ones respectable people were expected not to notice.

RELATED: Democrats love free speech — until conservatives get some

mikkelwilliam/iStock/Getty Images

This is why the hatred aimed at Musk is never really about money. The money supplies the moral pretext. Control supplies the motive.

The left does not hate Musk because he could “fund SNAP.” The federal government already spends enormous sums on SNAP, and no serious person believes American nutrition policy should depend on one weird rich guy hawking rocket shares. The left hates Musk because he took a portion of his unrealized fortune and bought a speech platform that was supposed to belong forever to the consensus managers.

Bad enough he became too rich. Worse, he became too independent.

A billionaire who funds the approved foundations may be vulgar, but he can be managed. A billionaire who underwrites lawsuits, climate conferences, university centers, “democracy” initiatives, and grants for people who use the word “equity” as an incantation may still be welcomed at the proper tables. His money can be baptized.

Musk’s money did something else. It bought the key to a door the regime wanted to remain locked.

No wonder they want to eat him.

​Opinion & analysis, Trillionaire, Elon musk, Twitter.com, Billionaires, Spacex, Freedom of speech, Leftists, Socialism, Snap, Funding, Economics 

On June 16, independent journalist and BlazeTV host Christopher Rufo published a detailed exposé on California’s “gay certification program” in City Journal. The report blew the lid off the progressive state’s initiative to pressure utility companies into awarding $633 million in contracts to businesses officially certified as LGBT-owned — complete with a bizarre state-run process requiring proof of sexual orientation.

To qualify, business owners must submit documents such as same-sex marriage licenses, letters from LGBT organizations, or even affidavits from personal contacts attesting to their sexual orientation, with stiff penalties including up to a year in jail for false claims.

Glenn Beck was astounded by the news.

“It’s insane,” he says.

The California bureaucrats hired to vet the applicants use a “gay certification checklist,” says Glenn’s chief researcher and writer Jason Buttrill.

“One of the checklist items is three letters of reference from personal contacts … who have known … for over one year and can vouch to the status of the individual’s gayness,” he laughs.

Glenn can’t help but laugh at what these types of conversations entail. “I mean what are the questions?” he chuckles.

Buttrill adds that another requirement is “one letter from a recognized LGBT organization attesting to the gay status and signed by the organization leader.”

“Now, you have to go not to a friend but to a sanctioned gay organization, so now they’ve given that gay organization power,” says Glenn. “Wow is that bad.”

Perhaps the strangest item on the checklist is “proof of media coverage, including publications, newspapers, or articles explicitly stating the LGBT status of the owners of the business.”

“You have to be kind of an activist. I mean, because if you’re just a quiet gay couple and you own a restaurant, you know, I guess that’s not good enough. You have to be out in the media, literally out in the media, declaring your gayness,” scoffs Glenn.

Another prerequisite is “a copy of valid municipal or state license, certificate of marriage, civil union, or domestic partnership,” adds Buttrill.

“You don’t need a license or any kind of identification to vote, but if you want to work as a gay person with the state, we have to have all kinds of ID — but gay ID,” laughs Glenn, calling it “ridiculous.”

“I would think the California gay community would be outraged over this. I wouldn’t think that they would want some kind of official list with some kind of certification program with their names,” says Buttrill.

Glenn agrees, highlighting how potentially dangerous such a list could be.

“I mean if things, God forbid, ever went horribly wrong — the Islamists or some crazy religious whatever or just somebody who … just doesn’t like gay people [gets in power], you want a list of people that are gay?” he asks.

“People are so blind and so stupid. … Well, good luck with that, California.”

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.

​The glenn beck program, Glenn beck, California, Voter id, Lgbt 

Thomas Jefferson warned that factions could subvert the public good once they captured the public councils. “Bribery corrupts them,” he wrote, and, “Personal interests lead them astray from the general interests of their constituents.”

That warning fits the data center fight now spreading across America. On this issue, the establishments of both parties have largely sided with Big Tech against communities that do not want their land, power, water, and quality of life sacrificed for the artificial intelligence gold rush.

Politicians who continue following the flow of corporate election cash may serve their puppet masters a little while longer. But the grassroots rebellion beneath them is growing.

The politicians appear to be betting that the campaign cash will outweigh voter anger. Are they right?

When I began covering the data center issue, opposition mostly came from scattered homeowners in rural communities. They fought these surveillance centers at county council meetings with rudimentary petition websites, homemade lawn signs, and four-figure local budgets.

Two years later, data center proposals have spread into nearly every corner of the country. So has the opposition. It is passionate, surprisingly bipartisan, and increasingly organized. A national election is also approaching.

Politico analyzed several dozen of the most competitive House races that will determine control of the chamber and found more than 200 data centers planned in those districts alone. In total, 1,500 data centers are planned or under construction in 232 congressional districts, although in my estimation, more of the mega-hyperscale facilities are in Republican districts.

That scale shows how ubiquitous the land grab has become. It also shows how potent this issue could be in the most consequential federal races.

Most competitive seats are held by Republicans, but many GOP incumbents have been cagey, even oleaginous, when asked about data centers. They avoid the issue as long as possible. When pressed at a town hall or by the media, they offer boilerplate about the need to “beat China” in innovation, then toss out an empty and impossible promise to protect consumers from higher electricity rates.

U.S. Rep. Brad Finstad (R-Minn.) gave Politico the cookie-cutter, split-the-baby response.

“AI data centers, like those proposed in southern Minnesota, can play an important role in both our economic future and our national security,” Finstad said. “At the same time, it’s important that communities have a full understanding of what these projects mean locally — including their energy demands, environmental impacts, job creation, and potential tax benefits. As we look toward the future of data-center development, we also need an honest conversation about whether our current energy infrastructure and power grid are prepared to support the growing demands of AI technology.”

OK, Brad. Seven projects are proposed in your district alone. Tell voters where you stand. Yes or no: Are you fine with Big Tech owning and repurposing this much farmland?

RELATED: The AI boom is turning public meetings into crime scenes

Moor Studio/Getty Images

Republicans face major headwinds this November. But if any issue could help them power through that adversity, it would be standing with their constituents against the Big Tech land grab.

The reason they do not is obvious. The campaign cash has to come from somewhere.

“They’re between a rock and a hard place,” Texas-based GOP consultant Brendan Steinhauser, whose clients have included Sen. John Cornyn (R) and Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R), told Politico. “Politically, it’s not a very smart move to come out and be seen as too close to Big Tech or doing the bidding of Big Tech, but a lot of the money is flying to them through that.”

Meanwhile, in one of the few districts where an incumbent Democrat is vulnerable this cycle, Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) has actually listened to her communities.

“There’s more political signs against AI in our region than for candidates in the upcoming races,” Kaptur said during a hearing this spring. “The public opposition that is arising, it’s spontaneous combustion coming up from the grassroots.”

But no one should mistake that for Democratic seriousness. Nothing is as righteous as a Democrat in the minority.

Virginia is the first state this cycle where Democrats have already flipped the levers of government and taken power. Abigail Spanberger ran on reining in the shocking colonization of Virginia by data centers. Now that she is governor, her urgency has faded.

Some backbenchers in both parties have pushed bills to limit tax breaks, but Spanberger and her allies in House leadership are blocking real reforms. So far, she has created a blue-ribbon commission to study the issue — a panel stacked with industry hired hands.

In Ohio, lawmakers recently learned that Big Tech tax breaks cost the state $2 billion in just one year, exponentially more than originally projected. Despite the GOP promise to repeal those tax breaks, the relevant committee adjourned for the last time until November without taking action. Even the proposal on the table would only have reduced the abatement prospectively, yet the industry still lobbied against it.

That “rock and hard place” keeps doing its work.

RELATED: OpenAI wants to make its losses public property

Brendan SMIALOWSKI/AFP/Getty Images

At the top of the political food chain, leaders of both parties are selling out to data centers. At the grassroots, voters on the right and left are fighting back.

In blue Maine and New York, legislative majorities passed versions of data center moratoriums. But Maine Gov. Janet Mills (D) vetoed the bill, and New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) has so far declined to sign hers. The squeeze from corporate money gets tighter the higher a politician climbs and the more money it takes to win.

Conversely, small counties and cities have begun enacting local bans. Coffee County, Tennessee, and the city of McMinnville in adjacent Warren County recently passed 18-month data center moratoriums. Warren County, Knox County, and Nashville are debating similar measures.

Again, the opposition is bipartisan. Nashville is deep blue, but Trump won Coffee County by 55 points and Warren County by 56 points.

Left-wing environmentalists tend to oppose growth and therefore naturally oppose this sort of resource stripping. But grassroots conservatives also understand that farmland, rural heritage, local sovereignty, and digital privacy are worth defending. Sometimes those interests converge.

Politicians who continue following the flow of corporate election cash may serve their puppet masters a little while longer. But the grassroots rebellion beneath them is growing. It is bipartisan, local, organized, and increasingly impossible to contain.

​Thomas jefferson, Ai, Data centers, Land grab, Gop, Politico, Republicans, Virginia, Ohio, Big tech, Data center ban, Opinion & analysis 

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is now looking into allegations of election fraud on Skid Row in Los Angeles.

The California Post reported that plainclothes federal agents are interviewing homeless people about the claims made in a video of votes exchanged for payment.

‘Yeah, they come out here all the time,’ said an unidentified woman who claimed she had been paid $2 to vote for Bass.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is also involved in the probe, according to the report.

The Justice Department only confirmed an investigation into a criminal matter and refused to offer additional information. The Post said its report determined the investigation was related to election fraud.

The investigation comes after a stunning video posted to TikTok that documented interviews with homeless people claiming they had been paid to vote for the Democrats in the Los Angeles mayoral election.

Republican mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt initially won second place in the jungle election, but after more votes came in, he slipped into third place and was boxed out of the general. Many suspected that his campaign was the victim of election fraud.

“Yeah, they come out here all the time,” said an unidentified woman who claimed she had been paid $2 to vote for Bass.

“They gave you an optional choice,” said a man calling himself Kevin Shepherd and claiming to have been paid $4 to vote for Bass.

He said they also would have paid him to vote for Nithya Raman, the other Democrat, but not for Pratt.

RELATED: Socialist mayoral candidate is outraged at encampment outside her LA home — it’s not what it seems

Another woman said she was paid $5 to vote for Bass, but a separate investigation found that she was likely not a voter in the mayoral election.

The Post also admitted it could not independently confirm the claims in the video, which has since been deleted.

Pratt has said he is moving on to another phase of saving Los Angeles, which has less to do with running for election and more to do with exposing corruption of the Democrats in charge.

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

​Election fraud, Homeless people, Justice department, Los angeles, Mayoral election, Skid row, Politics 

A shocking Rape Gang Inquiry Report on Britain’s grooming gang scandal has exposed widespread sexual abuse at the hands of immigrants that’s been allowed to continue for years with little to no mainstream reporting, and BlazeTV host John Doyle is among the few sounding the alarm.

“If you live in London, your backyard; if you live in the southwestern part of the United States, this stuff is actually happening. This is not just, like, some fun mythology you get to talk about where you’re connecting dots and patterns,” Doyle says.

According to the report, girls as young as 11 were targeted by perpetrators from Pakistani Muslim and other Muslim backgrounds who “operated under an honor- and shame-based clan code that treated non-Muslim girls, especially white working class girls, as property available for sexual use.”

“I’m sure it’s surprising to people who are actually finding out what we’ve known for literally over a thousand years, for 1,400 years, that you can’t actually co-exist with people. They’re not actually peaceful,” Doyle says.

“And yeah, we find out that this literally happened to the tune of 250,000. And local media is not even reporting on it. What should be maybe the biggest scandal of all time is not being reported on by mainstream news,” he says.

“Genuinely I struggle to think of a governing body more evil than what is going on right now in England,” he adds.

The report details the NHS’ recording of “genital injuries, multiple sexually transmitted infections in children as young as 13, pregnancies caused by rape, and suicide attempts.”

“The rape statistics rising so spectacularly, it literally boggles the mind. Something from about, you know, 8,500 to 70,000 in the time this report is seeking to expose,” Doyle comments.

“This is easily proven, by the way, statistically, as England is now quite literally the rape capital of the world. Currently sits at the highest rate. It’s like 117 per 100,000. And it’s pretty much entirely because of what can be described as an invasion of Britain by foreign hordes,” he explains.

“And maybe that per capita number isn’t enough, because from the inquiry they found that over 250,000 women had been victimized, with 87% of them being victimized by Muslims. And it’s not like the other 13% were all just, like, white British guys,” he continues.

“No, actually that was also mostly just, like, the non-Muslim immigrant groups like Nigerians, Indians, what have you,” he says. “And it’s incredible, too, because the very same leftists who have already facilitated and planned exactly this outcome for decades, they exist in a Venn diagram that’s literally a bubble with feminists who would very much also want to portray the face of rape as being, like, some white frat dude.”

Want more from John Doyle?

To enjoy more of the truth about America and join the fight to restore a country that has been betrayed by its own leaders, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Britain, Rape, John doyle, Islam, Muslim, Immigration, Grooming, England, London, Predator, The john doyle show 

A protest against police was broken up with tear gas over the lethal police shooting of a 1-year-old baby at a Walmart in Mississippi on Sunday.

Police said the driver was trying to run over officers who were investigating an alleged shoplifting incident at the store in Senatobia.

‘By the time I set my baby down, it was like three to four shots. … One of the shots hit him in his rib cage, and the other shots hit her in her arm and her thigh.’

Benjamin Crump, the attorney known for taking cases lauded by Black Lives Matter, released a statement criticizing police.

“A 1-year-old child is dead after police officers in Mississippi opened fire on a vehicle in a crowded Walmart parking lot in Senatobia,” he wrote.

“His mother, who has not been charged with any crime, says she was trying to communicate to officers that there was a baby in the car,” he added. “They fired anyway, leading to the death of an innocent 1-year-old. We intend to seek justice for baby Kohen and the life that was stolen from him.”

The Mississippi Bureau of Investigation released a statement about the events that led to the shooting incident.

Law enforcement officers were responding to a shoplifting call when they encountered two subjects and a juvenile fleeing from the store and into a vehicle, according to MBI.

“Officers attempted to stop the vehicle, but the driver drove in the direction of the officers, almost striking one,” the MBI continued. “An officer then discharged their weapon and the vehicle fled the scene. The subjects arrived at a local hospital where one juvenile child in the vehicle was pronounced deceased, and another subject had critical injuries.”

The agency said it would continue the investigation into the incident and share its findings with the attorney general’s office.

The Senatobia police indicated that the shooting officer was placed on administrative leave and added that the office was dedicated to “full transparency” in the case.

Crump identified the mother involved as Vellesiya Wiley and said they had gone to Walmart for diapers. Wiley claims her friend had been stopped, but she kept walking because “it had nothing to do with me.”

She said she had gotten to the car with her baby when her friend got inside. They encountered police, and Wiley described her response to the officers.

“I raised my baby up trying to show them that he was in the car,” she said.

She said her friend hit another car while Wiley’s door was opened, and then she heard gunfire from police.

“By the time I set my baby down, it was like three to four shots,” she said.

“One of the shots hit him in his rib cage, and the other shots hit her in her arm and her thigh,” she added.

She also denied that her friend tried to run over police.

“They was all on the right side, and she was driving towards the left,” she claimed.

RELATED: ‘Fed-up’ cities pass new laws to combat brazen organized retail theft: ‘The situation is out of control’

Mississippi Public Safety Commissioner Sean Tindell said that police body camera footage would not be released until after the investigation was completed and the results were presented to the attorney general’s office.

On Tuesday, community activists protested outside the store, and the Walmart closed down temporarily. Police responded by deploying tear gas to break up the demonstration.

“The only violence came from the police department when they decided to tear-gas peaceful protesters,” protest organizer Marquell Bridges said.

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

​Benjamin crump, Police shooting, Walmart, Mississippi, Racism accusation, Politics 

A 15-year-old female is accused of stabbing two people at a hair salon in Wilmington earlier this month — allegedly after her braids didn’t come out to her liking, Delaware State Police said.

State troopers responded to Fransiah African Braids in the 3900 block of North Market Street for a report of a stabbing around 4:30 p.m. June 7, police said.

‘Maybe it was self defense.’

During the incident, the teenager threw items inside the business before taking a pair of scissors from the hairdresser and entering a restroom, police said.

A short time later, she exited the restroom and confronted the stylist while threatening her with the scissors, police said.

After a verbal altercation, the teen assaulted and stabbed the hairdresser multiple times, police said.

A bystander tried to intervene and restrain the teen but also was stabbed during the incident, police said.

Both victims were taken to a local hospital with non-life-threatening injuries, police said.

Responding troopers found the teen outside the business and took her into custody without incident, police said, adding that she was taken to Troop 1, where she was charged with the following offenses, police said:

Second-degree assault (felony);Aggravated menacing (felony);Third-degree assault; andDisorderly conduct.

Justice of the Peace Court 11 arraigned her, and she was committed to the Department of Services for Children, Youth, and Their Families on a $10,100 secured bond, police said.

RELATED: Teen thug points gun in face of Marine Corps veteran, demands his car keys. But punk definitely picked wrong victim.

Image source: Delaware State Police

As you might expect, a handful of commenters on the state police’s Facebook post about the incident weren’t happy with the alleged behavior of the teen suspect — or what may have led to it:

“Maybe it was self defense,” one commenter said with just a hint of sarcasm.”Wow! What the hell raised this kid?” another user bluntly wondered.”Better ban knives and scissors,” another commenter noted.

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

​Delaware state police, Arrest, Juvenile, Stabbing, Scissors, Hair salon, Wilmington, Female suspect, Braids, Crime