Category: blaze media

Japan managed to sneak out a tie against the Netherlands after falling behind twice in a World Cup match on Sunday, but it was the Japanese fans who went viral after the game.

Making the trip to watch their team at AT&T Stadium in Arlington, Texas, fans saw a late goal in the 89th minute earn Japan a 2-2 draw against its Dutch opponents. After the game, though, Japanese fans truly went to work.

‘Return it the way you found it.’

Viral videos from all over the stadium quickly hit the internet, showing the Asian visitors whipping out blue garbage bags and methodically cleaning up their sections of the stadium.

The fans first used the bags as a way to celebrate their team, raising them in the air and letting them ripple like a wave until impressing the world by using the same bags to gather garbage later on.

“There’s a Japanese culture … which means we should be cleaner [than when] we came here,” a fan told Singapore outlet CNA. “So this is our mindset and this is very obvious that we are to clean up the stadium and that will [showcase] our good Japanese culture.”

RELATED: Japan is close to finding cure for rare disorder that devastates children

KDFW reported on comments from a Japanese teacher who further explained why the fans were all acting in unison.

“Japanese sports fans at world events who clean up the stadium are behaving much the same way they did when they learned how to enjoy sports as school boys and girls,” said Koichi Nakano, a politics and history teacher at Sophia University in Tokyo, Japan.

A popular Japanese phrase apparently embodies the idea: “Tatsu tori ato wo nigosazu,” which reportedly means “return it the way you found it.”

RELATED: Brazil sends off its World Cup team in the most Catholic way possible

L-R: Charlotte Wilson/Getty Images; Michael Steele/Getty Images

Beloved NFL quarterback Jameis Winston was also among the Japanese crowd cleaning up the garbage. At 6’4″, Winston stuck out like a sore thumb in the crowd of fans, but seeking no attention, he grabbed a blue bag and helped the Japanese supporters with their mission.

The New York Giants quarterback happened to be in that section of the stadium while reporting on the game for Fox Sports and decided to join in.

Japan’s next game is Sunday at 12:00 a.m. ET against Tunisia, taking place at Estadio BBVA in Guadalupe, Mexico, where the Japanese fans will most likely show up their Tunisian counterparts.

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

​Fearless, Soccer, World cup, Texas, Japan, Sports 

After years of accusations and abuse, those who have warned about previously concealed biolabs performing potentially dangerous work have seemingly been vindicated.

On Friday, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard broke “new ground” with the release of new information regarding the existence and United States’ funding of “more than 120 biolabs in over 30 countries, including Ukraine.”

These four labs alone … cost the American taxpayer over $9.25 million.

Blaze News previously reported that Gabbard has been calling for the investigation and increased oversight of the alleged foreign labs for at least four years, during which time she has been called a traitor for “parroting false Russian propaganda” by failed presidential candidate Mitt Romney, for example.

Now in a position to take action on this issue, Gabbard has begun the release of never-before-seen evidence of United States-funded biolabs, many of which are in Ukraine and which she said “could be at risk of compromise due to the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war.”

RELATED: Vindicated? Gabbard probes the biolabs Romney called her a ‘traitor’ for mentioning.

Samuel Corum/Getty Images

“Many of these U.S. government-funded biolabs are currently or have previously engaged in research using hazardous and highly contagious pathogens and in some cases included dangerous gain-of-function research, with very little visibility or oversight,” Gabbard said in the announcement.

Gabbard called out some of the biggest offenders in what she characterized as a “cover-up,” adding that the administration is committed to uncovering the information about these labs that has, until now, been concealed.

“Despite the obvious potential for catastrophic global impact that research on dangerous pathogens in biolabs can have, politicians and so-called health professionals like Dr. Fauci as well as entities within the Biden administration’s national security team lied repeatedly to the American people about the existence of U.S.-funded and supported biolabs,” she said. “Not only did they lie, they threatened those who attempted to expose the truth.”

This first release, found here, shows the location of “over 40 labs built and supported” in Ukraine, including a biosafety level 3-designated lab for human research and an “unknown” lab at the same level that is also marked as a location for biological weapons storage. Microbes at a lab with biosafety level 3 designation “can cause serious or potentially lethal disease through respiratory transmission,” according to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention training page.

The ODNI document notes that a biological weapons repository may contain dangerous pathogens, including but not limited to: “anthrax, tularemia, tuberculosis, swine fever, Newcastle disease, MERS, SARS, Marburg, Ebola, Lassa, the plague, rickettsia, etc.”

Most importantly, perhaps, is the third page of the document released by ODNI, which shows four examples of biolabs built and funded by the U.S. government.

The examples — together with the total cost in U.S. dollars, including design and construction, lab equipment, and furniture — are listed as follows: Kherson Diagnostic Laboratory, Kherson Oblast Laboratory Center, $1,728,822; Institute of Veterinary Medicine of the National Academy of Agrarian Sciences, $2,109,375.23; Central Reference Laboratory, Ukrainian Research Antiplague Institute, $3,492,551; Zakarpartska Diagnostic Laboratory, Zakarpartska Oblast Laboratory Center, $1,920,432.

These four labs alone, according to this information, cost the American taxpayer over $9.25 million.

The press announcement noted that this information release was published in cooperation with Executive Order 14292, signed by President Trump.

In this executive order, titled “Improving the Safety and Security of Biological Research,” Trump ordered the ending of federally funded biological research in foreign countries that lack adequate oversight and in “countries of concern.”

Gabbard has directed the intelligence community to learn more about these labs, and she claims they are already “learning new details … on clinical trials that are under way at these facilities and that are raising significant ethical, financial, and security concerns regarding the supposed public health initiatives and U.S. national security.”

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

​Anthony fauci, Biolabs, Donald trump, Tulsi gabbard, Ukraine, United states, Politics, Gain of function research 

Spencer Pratt has announced that he is “teaming up” with Kenneth Bass, the brother of Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass (D).

Kenneth Bass and his wife, Cindy, joined a lawsuit last month filed by Palisades fire victims against the mayor that blamed the city for the deadly disaster in 2025. The couple claimed that their Malibu home was a “total burn down” and that they suffered smoke inhalation and emotional distress.

‘I hope their Thanksgiving dinner isn’t too awks.’

The master complaint, filed last year, alleges “a series of cascading failures,” including that the city failed to maintain an adequate water supply. It further accuses the city of engaging “in a campaign of misinformation and misrepresentations” in an attempt to conceal its responsibility for the destruction.

The attorney representing Kenneth and Cindy Bass told the New York Post that their family connections to the mayor are “irrelevant,” adding, “As non-public citizens they are entitled to respectful privacy as they pursue their legal rights along with all represented victims.”

Bass’ office responded that there was “nothing new” about her brother joining the lawsuit.

“Thousands of people are plaintiffs in this action, which names 18 public and private-sector defendants,” a Bass spokesperson told The Hill.

RELATED: ‘It’s war’: Spencer Pratt says he’ll keep working to save Los Angeles — and claims to have damaging evidence

Apu Gomes/Getty Images

The Jan. 2025 Palisades Fire caused 12 deaths and destroyed thousands of structures.

The city and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, which was also named as a defendant in the lawsuit, deny wrongdoing. The city attorney’s office stated that it “remains confident” that the city “is not liable for these disastrous wildfires.”

RELATED: Los Angeles mayor race called for far-left challenger after Pratt loses 40,000-vote lead

Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times/Getty Images

On Sunday, Pratt announced that by filing a lawsuit against the city, he was effectively joining forces with Kenneth Bass.

“I am proud to be teaming up with Karen Bass’ brother in suing his sister for her reckless negligence that led to the destruction of our homes,” Pratt wrote in a social media post. “I hope their Thanksgiving dinner isn’t too awks. I know ours hasn’t been the same since last year…”

Pratt and his wife, Heidi Montag, filed a separate lawsuit against the LADWP last year after their home was destroyed in the fire. Their complaint similarly alleges that the city failed to maintain an adequate water supply.

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

​News, Spencer pratt, Karen bass, Los angeles, California, Palisades fire, Palisades, Politics 

After Karmelo Anthony was convicted of murdering Austin Metcalf, his parents are making their interview rounds — and BlazeTV host Jason Whitlock believes what they’re saying is completely “delusional.”

“My son is no murderer. My son didn’t intend to hurt anyone. My son was defending himself, and that’s what hurts so bad,” Anthony’s mother said in an interview on CBS News Texas.

Anthony told the interviewer that she asked the jury to “have mercy” on her son but that she knew “they had their minds made up already.”

“We were delusional. We thought we were going to get a fair shake,” Anthony’s father said.

The two also claimed that “everyone” lied on the stand, with his mother saying, “All of the witnesses’ statements were inconsistent. All of them.”

“So Karmelo Anthony’s father said, ‘We were delusional.’ And I think what he should have said is, ‘We are delusional,’” Whitlock says.

“And I say that not trying to be mean-spirited, but they are delusional. They live in a delusional space where their delusions are confirmed. … I just want you to look at the shirt,” he says, pointing out that in the interview, the father was wearing a shirt that reads “#BelieveKarmelo.”

“Why would we believe someone who’s not talking, who didn’t take the stand? What are we to believe? Does Karmelo believe what he’s saying? Because if he did, he would have taken the stand. It was the only chance they had — him taking the stand and convincing a jury that he acted in self-defense,” he continues.

“He didn’t tell his own story,” he adds.

Whitlock also points out that while the mother claimed the witness statements were “inconsistent,” the statements were actually “very consistent.”

“You have to explain to me what’s their motive for lying. Why lie? What’s the motive? The black witnesses, the black kids that all went on the stand and told a pretty consistent story amongst the group, what’s their motive?” he says.

“There’s an echo chamber of delusion that many black people live in, and it’s controlled by social media. And this is the danger of social media. They create these echo chambers where you can have all of your delusional thoughts confirmed,” he continues.

“‘He didn’t want to kill Austin Metcalf,’” he says, mimicking Anthony’s mother. “Your son brought a knife to a high school track meet and then told a kid, in front of other people, if you touch me, you’ll find out, or something to that degree.”

“This is a state of delusion that these people are existing in,” he adds.

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.

​Karmelo anthony, Austin metcalf, Jason whitlock, Fearless, Jason whitlock harmony 

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) was hospitalized Sunday morning, his spokesman has confirmed.

“Senator McConnell was admitted to the hospital this morning. He is receiving excellent care,” David Popp said Sunday, according to NBC News. Popp did not disclose the reason for the admission.

‘He is receiving excellent care.’

Two of McConnell’s neighbors reported witnessing the senator being placed into an ambulance outside his D.C. house, Reuters reported.

Alarm bells have been rung over McConnell’s health in recent years. In February, he spent a week in the hospital over “flu-like symptoms.” He also displayed multiple freeze-up incidents while speaking on camera in 2023.

McConnell, a childhood polio survivor, has been seen using a wheelchair to get around the Capitol on multiple occasions. It was described as a “precautionary” measure last year after falling down a small flight of stairs. An earlier fall left the senator out of work for several weeks with a concussion and rib fracture while a separate incident resulted in a sprained wrist.

RELATED: Trump-backed candidate easily wins primary to replace Sen. Mitch McConnell in Kentucky

Senator Mitch McConnell in the Senate Subway at the US Capitol on May 19, 2026. Al Drago/Bloomberg/Getty Images

President Donald Trump and McConnell have clashed over several key issues throughout the president’s second term, including McConnell voting against the confirmations of Department of War Secretary Pete Hegseth and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

McConnell has also been a strong supporter of Ukraine’s effort against Russia, criticizing Trump’s approach to the conflict and relationship with Vladimir Putin.

The 84-year-old was first elected to the Senate in 1984, serving as the GOP’s longest party leader from 2007 until he was succeeded by Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) in 2025. Earlier that same year, McConnell announced he would not seek re-election in the midterms. He is set to leave office in January 2027.

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

​Mitch mcconnell, Politics, Donald trump 

Three females were caught on video brutally beating and stealing from victims on a Philadelphia street, police said.

The Philadelphia Police Department’s Central Detective Division is seeking the public’s help in identifying the individuals responsible for the attacks, and police provided video and still images showing the suspects.

‘Conceal carry. A 9 mm would have resolved this issue.’

Police didn’t specify the number of victims in the brutal attacks, but WTXF-TV reported that there were two victims.

The beatdowns occurred around 2:15 a.m. April 18; police posted the notice describing the attacks earlier this month.

Police said the three culprits assaulted the victims along the 1300 block of Chestnut Street. Video shows one attack occurring on the sidewalk against the outside wall of a building; the other attack occurs on the street next to a parked car. The victims are repeatedly kicked and punched while on the ground.

Police said the victims’ bags were stolen, and their credit cards were later used fraudulently.

Video shows the street was crowded with pedestrians, but it appears only one person attempted to help the victims.

The victims were hospitalized with significant face and head injuries, police said.

Police offered the following descriptions of the suspects:

Suspect #1: Black female, 25 to 30 years old, 5’5″ to 5’7″, 150 pounds, medium buildSuspect #2: Black female, 25 to 30 years old, 5’2″ to 5’4″, 130 pounds, medium build, tattoo on right side chestSuspect #3: Black female, 25 to 30 years old, 5’5″, 175 pounds, heavy build

RELATED: Penn State senior shot dead just yards from his family’s South Philly home — after thugs apparently stole his phone

Police said if you see the suspects, do not approach — instead call 911 immediately.

To submit a tip by telephone, dial 215-686-TIPS (8477), police said. Tipsters also can use this electronic form to submit a tip anonymously, police said. All tips will be confidential, officials added.

Those with any information about this crime or these suspects also can contact the Central Detective Division at 215-686-3093 or 3094, police said.

More than 600 comments hit WXTF’s Facebook post about the beatings, and commenters did not hold back. The following are but a few reactions:

“Caught on camera! It’s just a matter of time before they are caught! Good for them!” one commenter exclaimed.”When caught, make an example of them!!” another user declared.”They’re good girls,” another commenter wrote sarcastically.”Conceal carry,” another user suggested. “A 9 mm would have resolved this issue.”

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

​Assaults, Beatings, Caught on video, Philadelphia, Physical attacks, Police, Suspects at large, Theft, Crime 

On June 2, 2026, the White House released an executive order on artificial intelligence called “Promoting Advanced Artificial Intelligence Innovation and Security.” The administration was at pains to explain what the order was not. It was not a burden or the Biden administration’s “top-down regulatory approach.” It was not, the official fact sheet insisted, mandatory licensing or pre-clearance or permitting of any kind. The document spent considerable energy describing its own absence.

This is a familiar American style of governance: The regulation that will not say its name.

How much technical judgment should a republic outsource to its security bureaucracy?

However, the order’s responsibility is actually rather specific. Within 30 days of signing, it directs federal agencies to prioritize the cyber defense of their information systems and requires the Department of Homeland Security to issue binding operational directives expanding AI-enabled defensive tools to federal agencies, state and local governments, rural hospitals, community banks, and local utilities. Within 60 days, it creates a classified benchmarking process, run by the Treasury Department and the NSA, to determine when an AI model’s capabilities have crossed a threshold and become what the order calls a “covered frontier model.” Developers may then voluntarily submit their model for government assessment. The government then gets 30 days to work with it before the developer shares it with anyone else.

The order is best understood as the third movement in a policy sequence that began with the first Trump administration. In 2019, the president signed an executive order framing American AI leadership as essential to both economic and national security but also emphasizing public trust, civil liberties, and privacy. In 2023, the Biden administration’s Executive Order 14110 described AI as holding both “promise and peril” and attempted something like a comprehensive social contract with the technology: safety and security, but also workers’ rights, civil rights, bias mitigation, and fraud prevention. On January 20, 2025, the new Trump administration rescinded that order. The declared rationale was ideological contamination. The Biden approach was “burdensome” and encoded “engineered social agendas.” The new policy would instead pursue American AI dominance, free from such considerations.

Government by bottleneck

What has been constructed is a security compact between the federal government and a small number of frontier-model developers. The developer will give the government access to a model, and the government will evaluate it. Together, they will decide who the “trusted partners” are who receive it next. The criteria for that evaluation are classified. The benchmarks are classified. The threshold for “covered” status is classified. Google and Sam Altman expressed support. The Business Software Alliance praised the order’s “voluntary and phased approach,” as though a process administered by the NSA with nondisclosure expectations was simply an industry working group.

RELATED: How to make DuckDuckGo your search bar go-to

herstockart/Getty Images

The order names its intended beneficiaries as “rural hospitals, community banks, and local utilities.” These institutions do not have cleared staff, government relationships, or the organizational bandwidth to absorb classified defensive intelligence. They are institutions named in the fact sheet because they are sympathetic. The institutions that will in fact operate inside the order’s core architecture are frontier developers and their vetted, trusted partners. Everyone else waits for whatever the clearinghouse sees fit to distribute, assuming they have the expertise to use it.

This is a recognizable form of 21st-century American governance: highly centralized technical judgment, thin public transparency, and broad downstream dependence. The polity is told that the infrastructure will be hardened. The decisive knowledge about how, by whom, and according to what criteria is held somewhere else.

The order speaks fluently about attack surfaces and remediation and covered models and patch distribution. In this language, every institution becomes a node. Hospitals, banks, utilities, and federal agencies are all nodes. They are surfaces of cyber vulnerability awaiting protection. The world is rendered as a network diagram, and the only question is whether the correct agencies have been directed to harden it.

What the order cannot conceal beneath its operational specificity is that this is a theory of governance as much as technology. The Atlantic Council, in criticizing the order, noted that classified criteria and delegated executive discretion create a serious accountability gap. That gap is the design.

Red tape on steroids

The order presents itself as the rejection of bureaucracy, yet is an elaborate bureaucratic instrument with deadlines and interagency consultations, directives, classifications, threshold determinations, and enforcement priorities. It relocates the machinery of governance away from NIST’s open and collaborative risk-management culture and toward the executive security apparatus: the NSA, the Treasury, the national cyber director. These institutions will now pass judgment about which AI systems are of concern.

One can stipulate that these institutions are serious, technically capable, and acting in good faith. One can stipulate that the cyber threats are real; the frontier labs’ own safety documentation already makes clear that the most capable models can automate sophisticated intrusions against hardened targets, discovering exploits and chaining vulnerabilities at a pace no human team can match. The question is how much technical judgment a republic should outsource to its security bureaucracy.

Administration officials’ bet is that urgency, expertise, and the specter of Chinese technological rivalry will supply sufficient legitimacy. They may be right. Urgency has carried American policy unquestioned a long way before. The order calls itself the enemy of regulation. It is instead regulation’s more exclusive cousin, with all the power, a fraction of the accountability, and a much shorter guest list.

​Tech 

Justin Gaethje put on the performance of a lifetime at the landmark UFC 250 event outside the White House Sunday night, finally capturing the undisputed, lightweight UFC championship belt.

Before the fight, Gaethje and his undefeated opponent, Ilia Topuria, both walked out to the UFC Octagon in epic fashion, starting in the Oval Office before making their way to the cage on the White House lawn.

‘I’m from America. Two hundred fifty years ago, we were way bigger than six-to-one dogs.’

A dark and cloudy sky served as the backdrop for the main event — which did not start until well after 12:30 a.m. ET — but once it started, there were only fireworks.

Gaethje overcame two significant near-defeat moments during the fight: first during the second round when devastating body shots from Topuria dropped him to the ground, and then a surprise takedown from the champion had Gaethje on the bottom and in trouble in the fourth round as well.

However, a mangled Topuria was unable to continue into the fifth, forcing the referee to stop the fight after he had already convinced ringside doctors to allow Topuria to keep fighting after the third round.

After the fight, announcer Joe Rogan asked Gaethje: “You have been waiting for this moment your entire career and to win it in such a spectacular fashion in a fight where you were at some points [a] six-to-one underdog. How good does this feel?”

“Hey, I’m from America. Two hundred fifty years ago, we were way bigger than six-to-one dogs, and look at us thriving now,” Gaethje patriotically replied.

The Safford, Arizona, native then immediately thanked all “current, former, and future military service members” for their service before revealing his true motivation for the fight.

“All glory to God. I prayed so much for this opportunity to do something legendary. And I know that was absolutely legendary ’cause I cannot even believe it,” Gaethje remarked.

RELATED: ‘I had the right papers’: Somali World Cup referee booted from US gets an answer from the White House

The 37-year-old then praised his mother’s “Mexican warrior spirit” and his father’s “German, hard-a** thick bones” for giving him the pedigree that saw him overcome abysmal odds. In fact, Gaethje was the only underdog to win a fight on the White House lawn on Sunday night.

Gaethje told Rogan that he used an unorthodox approach to get the best out of himself.

“I told myself I was going to get embarrassed so that I can go to my most primal place and dig deep. And I had to. That guy had me in trouble,” the fighter explained. “He rocked my chin, smoked my liver, and I stuck in it. And look at my face,” Gaethje laughed, suggesting the lack of damage showed that his skin needs to be studied by scientists.

Coming into the fight as only the interim lightweight champion, Gaethje is now undisputed, handing his Georgian opponent his first loss ever.

RELATED: Texas AG Ken Paxton threatens Big 12 over possible Texas Tech boycott

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

As reported by MMA Fighting, Gaethje was given two fight bonuses for his performance, which were heavily inflated sums due to sponsorships for the unique event.

With a Fight of the Night bonus of $400,000 and a Performance of the Night bonus of $425,000, Gaethje took home $825,000 in extra cash.

Heavyweight Ciryl Gane won the other Performance of the Night bonus for his second-round knockout of Alex Pereira to earn $425,000.

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

​Fearless, Ufc 250, White house, Justin gaethje, Mma, Sports 

A decade after starring in “Inception,” lesbian actress Ellen Page committed to her most challenging role yet: living her real life as an effeminate, short-haired transvestite named “Elliot Page.”

Page had her healthy beasts surgically removed, then announced in a Dec. 1, 2020, social media post, “I am trans, my pronouns are he/they and my name is Elliot.”

‘Sure sounds a lot like femininity.’

Having now played the role of Elliot for over five years, the biological female — who divorced her “wife” and leaned into her LGBT activism following the “transition” — now apparently feels sufficiently qualified to define what constitutes “healthy masculinity.”

As part of a broader media tour for her new LGBT propaganda film, “Second Nature,” Page recently sat down with the eponymous host of “It’s Open with Illana Glazer” for a heart-to-heart.

After claiming that the “gender binary … just doesn’t exist” and alluding to testosterone’s transformative impact on her baseline aggression, Page stated that healthy masculinity is “leaning away from whenever there is some sort of impulse or expectation you’ve put on yourself to, like, shut down or conform in a way that usually feels like this — like I am closing off.”

Page cited the reluctance among some men to smile in photos as typical of such emotional closure.

“To me, healthy masculinity would be, well, you know what — healthiness for anyone to just, you know, love themselves; be able to care for themselves; ideally get rest when they can, you know, like, just the practical basic — drink water, like, eat a banana. You know?” said Page.

RELATED: ‘Why don’t men go to therapy?’ It all comes down to one very good reason

The actress formerly known as Ellen Page, 2017. Jason LaVeris/FilmMagic/Getty Images

Page, 39, added in her rambling definition that healthy masculinity is “also just, you know, doing what you can to be intentionally and mindfully not letting yourself get, like, swayed or twisted by the rules that I feel like end up, like, leading to so many of the problems that we see that are, you know, do get inflicted by toxic masculinity, violence and abuse, just general cruelty.”

The actress, whose memoir details her history of depression and self-mutilation, padded her tortured definition by adding, “Healthy masculinity could just mean a really good cry.”

Critics relentlessly have mocked Page’s definition, which went viral on social media over the weekend.

Chris Elston, the anti-gender-ideology activist better known as Billboard Chris, quipped, “This is the most female conversation ever.”

Not the Bee, the non-satirical news companion to the Babylon Bee, wrote, “Wow, the healthy masculinity she’s talking about sure sounds a lot like femininity.”

“It’s so interesting that she embodies every female stereotype while trying to do her best impression of a man,” tweeted author and homeschooling advocate Rachel Wilson.

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

​Transgender, Lgbt, Leftism, Feminist, Masculinity, Man, Woman, Mental illness, Politics 

President Donald Trump announced on Sunday evening the finalization of an agreement that will tentatively bring an end to America’s 15-week war with Iran.

“The Deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran is now complete. Congratulations to all!” Trump noted in a Truth Social post. “I hereby fully authorize the toll free opening of the Strait of Hormuz, and, simultaneously herewith, authorize the immediate removal of the United States Naval blockade. Ships of the World, start your engines. Let the oil flow!”

‘I couldn’t believe it.’

In a subsequent post, the president said that this “Great Deal will bring Peace and Security to the whole Region.”

The memorandum of understanding was confirmed by Iranian officials as well as by Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, who has been acting as a mediator.

“Both sides have declared the immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon,” Sharif posted to X a few minutes before Trump’s Truth Social announcement. “The official signing ceremony will be on Friday, 19 June in Switzerland. We would like to thank the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran for their commitment to finding a diplomatic solution to the conflict.”‘

The news was welcomed by Lebanese President Joseph Aoun — who expressed hope that “these understandings being transformed into practical steps” may “put a definitive end to the cycle of violence” — and by other leaders around the globe.

Iran hawks, particularly in Israel, are not similarly keen over the prospect of ending the conflict in this fashion.

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, for instance, rushed to condemn the deal, claiming it was “bad for Israel and for the entire free world. Period.”

Smotrich noted further that Israel “will have to continue the campaign to topple the regime ourselves and in creative ways.”

RELATED: Trump boxes Netanyahu’s ears over Lebanon offensive, calls him ‘f**king crazy’: Report

Destroyed building in Nabatieh, Lebanon. Abbas FAKIH/AFP/Getty Images

Israel’s national security minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, also advocated for keeping the conflict alive, stating:

We are not partners to this agreement that does not ensure our security, and it does not bind us in any way. We must not compromise on anything less than the dismantling of Hezbollah, we must not withdraw from any territory that our fighters have captured and cleared of terror infrastructure, we must not return to a situation where thousands of terrorists sit on the fences of northern settlements, and certainly we must not remain silent for a moment in the face of fire directed at the State of Israel.

Alleged attacks on Hezbollah — such as those championed by Ben-Gvir — nearly blew up the peace deal over the weekend, just as escalations in Israel’s offensive in Lebanon critically strained negotiations earlier this month.

Trump told Axios that the deadly Israeli airstrike in the southern suburbs of Beirut on Sunday “shook it up. It delayed the signing by a few hours. It was supposed to be now. Now it is scheduled for a few hours from now.”

The American president — who reportedly raced to save the deal as Iranians were threatening retaliation — said that he had been shocked to learn of the attack from his advisers.

“It is so bad — I couldn’t believe it. An hour before we are supposed to sign the deal,” said Trump.

Trump figured the attack — which took place after Hezbollah launched a drone attack on Northern Israel that reportedly caused neither injuries nor damage — was disproportionate. Weeks after calling Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “f**king crazy,” Trump once again blasted the foreign leader.

“Why did Bibi have to do a f**king attack? I was so pissed off,” said Trump. “I let him know. He has no f**king judgment. I let him know that.”

Trump expressed frustration with Netanyahu in another interview on Sunday, telling the New York Times that the Israeli prime minister, whose criminal trial is ongoing, is “a very difficult guy.”

“And to be honest with you,” continued Trump, “he should be very thankful to us for doing this. Because if Iran had a nuclear weapon, Israel wouldn’t be around for two hours.”

Netanyahu’s former communications adviser, Aviv Bushinsky, emphasized that the Israeli prime minister “needs Trump” and that “evangelicals and many members of the Republican Party” will prevent his relationship with Trump from falling apart.

While Netanyahu has yet to publicly address the deal, Israeli officials told Ynet News that Netanyahu made clear to Trump that Israel will not withdraw from Lebanon.

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

​Israel, Donald trump, Benjamin netanyahu, War, Iran, Lebanon, Strait of hormuz, Blockade, Politics 

After ballots showed up overnight for Nithya Raman to secure her unlikely win over Spencer Pratt in the Los Angeles mayoral election, the integrity of the California voting system is once again being questioned.

And senior counsel for the Article III Project, Will Chamberlain, has a solution.

“If I were investigating, I’d start with the prediction markets where … pretty early on election day, well before there was any sort of public indication that the votes were going to start going Nithya Raman’s way so dramatically with late mail-ins, there was a big boost,” Chamberlain tells BlazeTV host Liz Wheeler on “The Liz Wheeler Show.”

“She was getting way ahead in her prediction market odds even though she was still down massively in the count at the point. So I think that’s the first place you start,” he says.

Wheeler, disturbed by the results of the election, points out that conservatives have a “moral imperative” to fix this problem for the “survival of our republic.”

And Chamberlain has a solution — which begins with recognizing that “we don’t have the votes” to pass the SAVE America Act.

Instead, he has a better idea.

“My basic idea is Mike Johnson in the House when it comes time to actually seat the representatives from California, any representative who wasn’t ahead on Election Day, you don’t provisionally seat them,” he explains, telling Wheeler that you then refer them to a committee that “evaluates these things.”

“And then you do an individualized process, and they have to show up and prove that they won legitimately. And if they can’t do that, then they don’t get sat and California can go back and do a special election again.”

Wheeler finds Chamberlain’s solution “interesting” because “Congress has the authority to do that.”

“It’s a way of auditing, you could say, the election integrity laws of states,” she says.

“That would be a very interesting way for Congress to say, well, maybe we don’t have authority, but we do have authority,” she adds.

Want more from Liz Wheeler?

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

​The liz wheeler show, The blaze, Article iii project, Will chamberlain, Save america act, California, Election, Spencer pratt, Nithya raman, Karen bass 

While some believe that the sentencing of Karmelo Anthony wasn’t harsh enough, others — including rapper Cardi B — are outraged that he got sentenced at all.

“Wow! Just freakin wow! DISGUSTING… This is not justice, this is trying to make an example!!!” Cardi B wrote in a post on X.

BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey is disturbed by the rapper’s response, especially considering that it is shared by many on the left.

“What are you even saying?” Stuckey asks. “Not that I expected Cardi B to understand what due process is or to have this solid moral compass, but also, like, if Nicki Minaj can do it, I feel like you could too, Cardi B.”

“I feel like if you just tried and you turned your thinking cap on for a second, you could see that yeah, murder is bad and you should go to jail for murder,” she continues.

“He’s not getting the death penalty. He’s not getting life in prison. He’s going to get out when he’s in his mid-30s. He could get married. He could have kids. He could probably get a job,” she says, noting that Austin Metcalf will get none of that.

“And yeah, we should make an example out of murderers. That’s part of the reason for the justice system. It is preventative in that way. It is saying, ‘Hey, if you do this, you will also get this punishment, so don’t do it.’ Like, that’s a good thing. We want people who are potential murderers to see the justice system actually working and saying, ‘I’m going to think twice before I kill someone because I’m mad that they threatened to touch my backpack,’” Stuckey says.

“It’s not just rappers like Cardi B. It’s not just these random activists. It’s also representatives. It’s also congresspeople,” she adds, playing a clip of Jasmine Crockett responding to Anthony’s sentence.

“Black women, especially black women who have black male children, live in fear and agony every single day. A fear and agony that, I promise you, the Metcalfs probably never spend a day living that way,” Crockett said.

“Why? Why do they live in fear and agony?” Stuckey asks. “Why do moms of black boys, black men, live in fear and agony? Has nothing to do with Austin Metcalf. Has nothing to do with the police. Has nothing to do with white people.”

“If black mothers fear for their sons’ lives, the fear should be toward other black men, because statistically, black men are the ones killing black men,” she adds.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Relatable, Allie beth stuckey, Karmelo anthony, Cardi b, Blazetv, Nicki minaj, Jasmine crockett, Austin metcalf, Relatable with allie beth stuckey 

I’m in a particularly good mood as I write this. I’m on vacation, you see.

And not just anywhere; this is a very special destination. It’s not particularly luxurious or fashionable; I’m pretty sure most of the beautiful people are in St. Barth’s or the Hamptons. If you want a four-star resort experience, look elsewhere.

Unlike in our country, here it’s only customary to check in on the news once or twice a day. So people tend to focus less on what they can’t control.

But something about being here always puts my heart and soul at ease; when I return to normal life, it’s with a sense of deep contentment.

For one thing, I love the people. In many ways they are poorer than we are; they’re certainly not as technologically advanced. And yet the average person on the street seems to take special pride in his appearance. Good, presentable clothes; careful grooming; even posture is somehow straighter.

Continental breakfast

Welcome to the great nation of “Midcentury America.” They say the past is a foreign country. If so, the United States as it was 50 to 80 years ago is one of my favorite places to visit — if only via old photographs.

I love to explore all of its different regions. The 1960s is a favorite, closely followed by the ’50s. I also enjoy stopping by the ’40s every now and then.

And I have to admit there’s a special place in my heart for the ’70s. Avocado couches? Burnt orange blankets? Deep shag wall-to-wall carpets in Harvest Gold? Bring it on! It’s all part of the charm.

And the cars! Tesla and other marvels of modern automotive design haven’t gotten here yet. But take it from me, you barely miss them. How could you? When you’re on safari, you don’t long for the petting zoo. So many magnificent species of Detroit engineering and design: Lincoln Continentals, Pontiac GTOs, Chevy Impalas. I still remember the awe on my minivan-raised children’s faces the first time they encountered a Ford Country Squire.

RELATED: The one word that can help you use technology — without letting it use you

VCG/Getty Images

Peace and prosperity included

Despite how unusual many of the sights here may seem to visitors, Midcentury America somehow feels like home. No smartphones or flat-screen TVs, but you wouldn’t call it “backward.” Everything is modern, without collapsing into that flat, gray “spaceship” style we’re so fond of in 2026.

It all makes for a certain optimism that is all too rare where we live. And it’s a real, earned optimism; Midcentury’s proximity to two devastating world wars — not to mention a depression — means its citizens have no illusions about the fragility of life. And maybe that’s why they never seem to take what peace and prosperity they have for granted.

Yes, there’s the Cold War and nagging fears about nuclear annihilation. But unlike in our country, here it’s only customary to check in on the news once or twice a day. So people tend to focus less on what they can’t control and more on the people right in front of them.

This is a place where the future is always brighter. No wonder they have so many children!

Bring the kids

The more I visit, the more I’m convinced that the children are the key to it all. Each kid a family has is like a small “buy in” to their society; an unspoken, shared belief that this will all continue as one generation yields to another.

Trips to Midcentury America always seem to end just as you’ve really gotten the hang of the place; that’s the nature of a tourist visa. Leaving is always bittersweet, but the country always leaves its mark. I like to think that each time I return, I bring with me some of their gratitude and indefatigable optimism. Back home, a little of that goes a long way.

​Lifestyle, Travel, America, Nostalgia, Midcentury, Men’s style, The root of the matter 

A group of lawyers were caught red-handed by a judge who said she is tired of the courts being burdened.

What started out as a mundane case of a lawyer claiming he was owed legal fees turned into an embarrassing ordeal for both the municipal government and the lawyer seeking remuneration.

‘A prime example of the risk associated with serving as a rubberstamp.’

Last October, a court in Aberdeen, Mississippi, awarded lawyer Tom Withers III attorney’s fees and expenses stemming from a previous case he worked on. Legal documents accessed by Blaze News stated that attorneys for the city, rather than the city itself, were held responsible for the payment of the fees.

This meant that those involved in the case included Withers, his attorneys Kathleen M. Wilson and Shauncey Hunter Ridgeway, and the city’s lawyers Kathryn Y. Williams and Mark C. McClinton.

Both parties filed submissions, and within a two-week period the legal process was ready to continue — until a review of the submitted briefs showed that both parties had submitted documents containing nonexistent citations that were hallucinated by AI.

Withers’ lawyers signed off on a filing that contained citations described as “hallucinatory,” while the city lawyers signed off on two filings that contained fake citations on behalf of the jurisdiction.

The court then asked the attorneys from both sides to show why they shouldn’t be sanctioned for their behavior.

RELATED: iPhone’s debut crushed young women’s fertility, new study says

Douglas Graham/Roll Call/Getty Images

Both parties eventually admitted that their citations resulted from unverified use of artificial intelligence.

In January, all the attorneys were in attendance for a hearing where they “expressed embarrassment and apologized to the Court,” the filing read.

Lawyer Williams admitted to using an AI tool to do legal research, while Wilson admitted to using generative AI to draft her filing. Neither verified their work before submitting it.

The other two lawyers, Ridgeway and McClinton, admitted that they did not review the filings before submitting them to the court, but signed off on them electronically anyway.

RELATED: Even if you don’t choose to use AI, you’re probably interacting with it

Ezra Acayan/Getty Images

This all fell on the desk of Judge Sharion Aycock, a senior U.S. district judge for the Northern District of Mississippi, appointed by President George W. Bush in 2007.

Aycock wrote that the lawyers essentially had wasted court resources and called out the two local attorneys for their behavior.

“In an era of rampant unverified AI usage within the legal field, this case presents a prime example of the risk associated with serving as a rubberstamp when acting as local counsel.”

Additionally, Aycock described the “unusual scenario” as one in which “attorneys for both litigants engaged in similar sanctionable conduct.”

Judge Aycock added, “This Court is yet again ‘burden[ed] [with] addressing AI hallucinations in court filings.’ … While ‘[g]enerative technology can produce words,’ it cannot attach ‘… sincerity, truth, or responsibility to what it writes. That remains the sacred duty of the lawyer who signs the page.'”

On X, lawyer Rob Freund reported that among the sanctions placed on the lawyers, they were handed fines ranging from $1,000 to $3,500 and a disqualification from practicing in the district for two years.

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

​News, Mississippi, Artificial intelligence, Tech, Court 

We feel it at the grocery store. We feel it when we pay our utility bills. We feel it every time we check our bank accounts and browse house listings. I especially feel it when just two bags of groceries cost me more than a hundred dollars.

America’s affordability crisis is real. Inflation is hurting families. Housing costs are through the roof. The American dream feels increasingly out of reach for many young people.

Our story isn’t unique. For most of history, families have built stability and wealth together rather than waiting until they had already achieved it.

But what if part of the problem isn’t just economic? What if it’s cultural?

What if it’s that more and more of us are postponing — or outright rejecting — the very milestones that once allowed our country to thrive?

For generations, marriage and family were some of the biggest building blocks of financial stability and success. Today, marriage rates are declining, family formation is delayed, and birth rates have fallen so low that we can’t even replace ourselves. At the same time, Americans are marrying later than ever, and first-time homebuyers are now 40 years old on average.

These aren’t isolated trends. They are interconnected signs of a culture that has turned family from a foundation for building a good life into a finish line that many feel they must reach only after they have “made it.”

Foundation, not finish line

I didn’t grow up in affluence by any means. Things were often tight at the Thorman household with nine children (yes, all from the same parents), though none of us went “without.” My parents and their friends welcomed kids into the world with open arms even though they had no idea how they were going to afford us.

When my older siblings were born, things were so tight that they mostly lived on beans and rice and a whole lot of prayer. My dad worked extremely hard, and with smart financial decisions coupled with his integrity and strong work ethic, his salary increased over the years — just as the data has long predicted.

But one thing my parents didn’t have was Pinterest-perfect homes, luxury vacations, or every financial box checked before starting a family. They just did it. They just got married young, committed to one another, welcomed children, and built a life together.

I’m not advocating for irresponsibility, but we need to regain knowledge that was once intuitive: Marriage and family don’t stand in the way of financial success; they help create it.

Having it all

Our culture has it all backward. The expectation that we have to travel the world, have perfect-looking homes, and “find ourselves” before settling down has not made us happier or more financially savvy. Rather, it has only made us more miserable, lonely, and empty.

The very lies society feeds us about delaying marriage and family in order to “have it all” often undermine the very things people are seeking: financial stability, purpose, belonging, and long-term happiness. These are not obstacles to marriage and family; they are the fruit of them. We have convinced an entire generation that family should come after success, when for much of human history, family was the primary way people built success.

The data bears this out. Marriage and stable two-parent households consistently produce better economic outcomes: higher household income, greater wealth accumulation, lower poverty rates, and greater financial stability for children. Imagine that. The family structure God designed not only benefits individuals spiritually and emotionally, but also creates some of the strongest economic outcomes for families and society alike.

Having a family will alter your priorities, and rightly so. For my husband and me, having two kids (with more to come, God willing) has changed how we spend our money, where we spend our time, and what we value the most. We hardly get to take vacations, let alone the kind “influencers” brag about on social media, and that’s OK. I’ll take my kids over luxury experiences every day. So yes, kids change your lifestyle — and that’s a good thing.

For me, I get to do life with my best friend and make carbon copies of us, and it’s exceptionally awesome. I want everyone to experience it, because my family isn’t the obstacle to a meaningful life; it’s the source of one.

My story isn’t unique. Social science has been documenting the economic benefits of marriage and family for decades.

RELATED: How to bring Charlie Kirk’s vision to life — starting in your own family

Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Marriage: The great anti-poverty program

Washington politicians love to debate tax credits, subsidies, and government programs, yet one of the strongest predictors of economic stability isn’t a government policy at all — it’s marriage. Certainly, government policies matter. Washington can lower taxes, reduce burdensome regulations, and make housing more affordable. But no government program can replace what strong marriages and families provide: stability, sacrifice, belonging, and a purpose larger than ourselves.

Research from the Institute for Family Studies found that among Millennials who graduated high school, worked full-time, and married before having children, 97% avoided poverty altogether by their mid-30s. Far from being obstacles to financial stability, marriage and family are often among the strongest predictors of it.

My husband and I are a testament to that reality. We got married in our 20s with very little to our names. No trust funds or other “head starts”; nor did we have every financial box checked. We simply started building our life together anyway.

Since then, our careers have grown and our incomes have increased. After living in a small apartment and saving as much as possible, we purchased our first home — including a nice yard to play in — after welcoming our first child. Our story isn’t unique. For most of history, families have built stability and wealth together rather than waiting until they had already achieved it.

Worthy inheritance

The financial advantage enjoyed by married households extends to the whole family. Children raised in stable two-parent homes are far less likely to experience poverty and far more likely to move up the economic ladder. In 2021, just 9.5% of children living with two parents were in poverty, compared to 31.7% of children living with a single parent.

Strong families provide stability, support, and opportunity in ways that no government program can ever replicate. If we truly want to reduce poverty, expand opportunity, and strengthen our nation’s long-term prosperity, we must acknowledge the indispensable role marriage and family play in human flourishing.

Whatever efforts Washington makes to ease Americans’ financial burdens — whether through tax cuts or education reform — lasting change must start with us. Too many young people who tell themselves they’re putting off marriage and children for financial reasons are in fact mistaking risk for impossibility. Building a life has always required a leap of faith.

It’s a leap more of us have to make if we want to keep the American dream alive. Can we afford to have children? The better question is can we afford not to. If we want more prosperity, opportunity, and stability, we should start by strengthening the institution that has helped make those things possible for generations: the family.

​Marriage and family, Faith, Affordability, Lifestyle, Motherhood, Children, Christian living 

A UFC Freedom 250 event on the South Lawn of the White House — with a 5,000-seat temporary stadium and 85,000 tickets for viewing on massive screens on the Ellipse — has sparked controversy. The event is unprecedented, and it falls on President Trump’s birthday.

Put aside what you think of Sunday’s extravaganza. There is still a good reason to embrace June 14: Flag Day.

Those allergic to all things Trump should remember that Flag Day existed decades before he was born and, God willing, will endure for generations after.

Flag Day has a long tradition. Yet if not for its coincidence with Trump’s birthday, it would likely pass with little notice. That is a mistake. This is not a call to worship a colorful banner. It is a call to remember that Americans — left, center, and right — are united by founding principles from the Declaration of Independence, represented by Old Glory.

On June 14, 1777, the Second Continental Congress approved a resolution establishing a uniform national flag. The 13-star flag, commonly associated with Betsy Ross, became a rallying banner and a source of pride. It was not yet revered as it would be later, but it symbolized the freest nation in world history.

Then came the Civil War and the lowering of the flag over Fort Sumter. That image triggered an outpouring of love for Old Glory.

Jonathan Flynt Morris, a banker and strong Republican Unionist, urged Charles Dudley Warner, editor of the Hartford Evening Press, to write about the need not merely to respect the flag, but to revere it. On June 10, 1861, Warner followed that advice and proposed a new holiday: Flag Day.

“This flag is our dearest symbol of nationality,” Warner wrote. “It stands for civil liberty on this continent. To keep it full high advanced is our highest pride; to strike at it is to arouse all the passion of the nation to defend it, and to punish the perpetrators of the outrage.”

Flag Day celebrations began in Warner’s home state of Connecticut. They slowly spread to schools in Wisconsin in 1885, New York schools in 1889, and then to Philadelphia and public buildings in New York state in 1894. An American Flag Day organization was created to further the movement.

President Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat, issued the first federal recognition of the holiday on May 30, 1916. Wilson’s proclamation called for patriotic exercises that would “give significant expression to our thoughtful love of America” and our understanding of “the great mission of liberty and justice to which we have devoted ourselves as a people.”

RELATED: Damning poll reveals what Democrats ACTUALLY think of America ahead of its 250th birthday

Stan Grossfeld/The Boston Globe/Getty Images

He also called Americans to rededicate themselves to the principles of “independence, liberty, and right,” which no person “can corrupt” and no influence could draw away from their ideals. Finally, on Aug. 3, 1949, President Harry S. Truman, also a Democrat, signed an act of Congress designating June 14 of each year as National Flag Day.

Flag Day exemplifies our shared American creed. It was the brainchild of Republicans, spread outside party politics, and was instituted nationally by Democrats. Its purpose is to recommit us to the founding principles declared in the Declaration of Independence and embedded in the Constitution: equality, limited government, the rule of law, unalienable rights, the social compact, and the right to alter or abolish oppressive government.

America did not fully live by those principles in 1776, and we do not perfectly live by them today. But belief in those principles has inspired generations of patriots to move us closer to their fulfillment. Abolitionism, women’s suffrage, and the civil rights movement all called upon America’s first principles to push the country toward its promise. At its best, our flag stands for liberty and equality.

Those allergic to all things Trump should remember that Flag Day existed decades before he was born and, God willing, will endure for generations after. It is not about one man. It is a call for all Americans to unite around the principles that made the country possible.

We should answer that call.

​Charles dudley warner, Civil war, Jonathan flynt morris, Opinion & analysis, White house, Woodrow wilson, Harry s truman, Flag day, American founding, Donald trump 

Augustine of Hippo is one of the most influential philosophers and Christian theologians in history, and he had a stark warning for the Western world: “A man has as many masters as he has vices.”

And Seth Gruber, CEO of White Rose Resistance, is relaying this warning, explaining that it means “by promoting vice, the regime promotes slavery, which can then be fashioned into a form of political control.”

“That sentence I just said Allie Beth is the beating heart of libido dominandi: the lust to dominate,” he tells BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey on “Relatable.”

“Dominion becomes domination when man listens to and accepts the serpent’s counterfeit kingdom. And the things that we were called to steward … become the very things we are now enslaved to,” he says.

“Domination is a reflection of your own slavery projected onto others. But dominion is a reflection of your own stewardship exercised on behalf of others. So one is the city of man, and one is the city of God,” he continues. “But in each case, it reveals who or what we really worship.”

“Vice,” Gruber explains, “is contagious.”

And like anything contagious, it’s easily spread.

“Tyrants work very hard to spread the infection,” he explains, “because they know that a virtuous populace cannot be controlled. So they have to corrupt, seduce, blackmail. They have to weaponize lust.”

Gruber likens this to Jeffrey Epstein, because if “you cannot defeat militarily, you can always corrupt through sexual enticement.”

“Maybe that’s why the Epstein list will never get released,” he adds.

Stuckey agrees, adding, “What a fascinating, very disturbing connection … Epstein, you can just see it.”

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Allie beth stuckey, Augustine, Christian theologians, Jeffrey epstein, Libido dominandi, Seth gruber, Relatable with allie beth stuckey 

For years, AI elites like Sam Altman, Jensen Huang, and even Elon Musk touted a future in which AI stole all the jobs and humanity simply accepted a life of meaningless unemployment while receiving a meager allowance of universal basic income until our dying days. Something changed recently, though, and several of those same elites are suddenly backpedaling on their promises of the past. What changed? There are a few possibilities.

Seemingly all at once, the CEOs of the world’s leading AI platforms, particularly OpenAI and Anthropic, both reneged on their opinions on artificial intelligence in the workplace. Where AI was once prophetically decreed to replace everyone’s jobs, now these bots are being positioned as tools to enhance human productivity instead.

But why? For what reason would the AI CEOs, who once plotted workplace domination, suddenly turn back on their greedy aspirations? Did they suddenly remember that humanity must somehow live on after all the jobs dry up? That their companies will lose money if consumers don’t exist to buy products and services? That it’s actually evil to force people into unemployment amid a hostile takeover of the entire economy?

Public sentiment around AI is at an all-time low, and it continues to bottom out.

Maybe. Or perhaps something is forcing their hands.

Four reasons the AI job apocalypse is finished

It’s IPO time

Both OpenAI and Anthropic are at pivotal points in their meteoric rise to ubiquity. Neither company is turning a profit, and as time drags on, venture capitalists, who will never get a return on investment with generative AI, are more likely to reduce or even pull their funding. That means AI companies looking to survive the impending bubble have to find funding elsewhere. The answer is to go public.

The two AI giants plan to launch IPOs this year, and they need strong public support to drive value. If the companies are perceived as harmful or even complicit in obliterating the workforce and killing the economy, their IPOs will tank. As a result, they have pulled back on the dystopian warnings of mass unemployment as they tidy up their reputations to portray benevolent corporations bent on helping humanity instead of hindering it.

Reality check

While the AI CEOs promised a workplace revolution on the backs of their LLMs, the real-world applications for these platforms have fallen short of expectations. In May, Starbucks retired its AI-powered inventory system, despite supposed “improved product availability in stores” ushered in by the service. Employees responded by praising the change, saying, in effect, thanks for discontinuing automatic counting! The thought behind it was great, but the execution was proving difficult.

Also in May, a Gartner study revealed that 80% of companies that replaced employees with AI did not see better returns. Meanwhile, companies that added AI to their workforce to enhance the productivity of existing employees without eliminations saw the strongest gains, highlighting the need for skilled employees to coexist alongside AI platforms.

RELATED: Google’s new daily helper knows all about you. Just how creepy is it?

Google’s new daily helper knows all about you. Just how creepy is it? Marina113/Getty Images

Lastly, some companies, like Meta, are learning the hard way that AI isn’t a replacement for human intellect. As we reported in early June, hackers tricked Meta’s AI customer support bot into changing the passwords on high-profile Instagram accounts with little security to stand in the way. This was a massive blunder for Meta — which recently laid off 8,000 employees in favor of AI — in what became the company’s largest account breach ever.

Public protests

Public sentiment around AI is at an all-time low, and it continues to bottom out as time goes on. Just last month, numerous videos surfaced of college graduates booing commencement speakers for merely bringing up AI. Young people looking to enter the workforce, where entry-level positions are among the first to dissolve in the AI race, seemingly appear to hate LLMs. Since this demographic is the future customer base for AI giants, OpenAI and Anthropic would be stupid to continue to ruin young people’s lives with more promises of job replacements.

Another point of contention among the people focuses around data centers. Not only do these massive buildings devour local energy, there are also growing reports that they generate loud noises that have caused some unsettling health effects, including headaches, dizziness, nausea, sleep disturbances, and more.

Hefty price tags

Finally, companies are learning that AI is expensive to run at scale. Microsoft, one of the leaders in the AI space, canceled its Claude Code licenses for employees just months after starting the program. Although no official reason was given, the high cost and volume of Claude tokens required for sophisticated projects is believed to be the culprit. At the same time, Uber’s chief operating officer cited concerns over the high cost of AI that made it difficult to justify. Even AI GPU maker NVIDIA admitted that human employees cost less than AI bots.

During a recent event, Sam Altman was asked about the sizeable AI costs for businesses. He feigned ignorance, stating that “the issue never came up” in the past when setting the prices for companies. “People were totally happy with the amount they were spending.” That appears to no longer be the case.

​Tech 

When Jase Robertson found himself in a movie theater featuring “Project Hail Mary,” he thought he was about to watch a football movie or a film on the Virgin Mary.

What he actually saw stunned him so intensely that it now ranks among his “top five” most shocking experiences ever.

“The reason I was shocked is there was so many spiritual vibes to this movie,” he said on a recent episode of “Unashamed.”

Between the main characters being named Grace and Rock, several nods to the idea of a “savior of the world,” and themes of self-sacrifice and redemption, Jase was astonished that Hollywood produced such a film, especially in this age.

But then the real stunner came.

“There is a Phil Robertson quote in the movie,” Jase exclaims.

After the movie ended, Jase set out with a mission to discover the “story” behind how a big-budget Hollywood blockbuster managed to slip a Phil quote into the script.

Artificial intelligence gave him a strange answer: The line in “Project Hail Mary” was not a Phil Robertson quote, even though it is “a universal accepted fact” that he coined the phrase.

But Jase doesn’t need AI to confirm what he knows is true. “There is a Phil Robertson quote in there, and I didn’t think that was an accident based on everything else I had seen.”

Jase, calling the movie “top-notch,” praises the directors for allowing the film to “play both sides” of the spiritual argument.

He recalls a scene in which Ryland Grace (played by Ryan Gosling) has a spiritual conversation with Eva Stratt, the no-nonsense administrator who gets tapped by world governments to lead Project Hail Mary.

Grace inquires whether or not she believes in God, to which she replies, “It’s better than the alternative.”

“It was just like, well, I know which side of the production that line came from,” says Jase, calling the film “a wonderful experience.”

To hear more, watch the episode above.

Want more from the Robertsons?

To enjoy more on God, guns, ducks, and inspiring stories of faith and family, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Unashamed with the robertsons, Jase robertson, Project hail mary, Unashamed 

One of the most common objections to Christianity is simple: The word “Trinity” does not appear in the Bible. If that is true, why do Christians believe it?

Christians believe the Trinity because it is the inevitable conclusion of what Scripture teaches about God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit.

The doctrine of the Trinity is therefore not an arbitrary invention. Nor is it a concession to polytheism. It is precisely the opposite: a refutation of polytheism.

The story begins in Genesis.

The Jewish Scriptures, what Christians call the Old Testament, taught something unique among the religions of the ancient world. Pagan nations treated their gods as physical beings within the universe. Israel taught that God created the heavens and the earth. God was not part of the system. He brought the system into existence.

God is therefore not made of matter, not located at one point in space, and not one deity among many. He alone existed from eternity. Everything else had a beginning.

Israel was repeatedly tempted to compromise with the polytheistic religions around it. Time after time, the prophets called the nation back to the worship of the one true God. Through Isaiah, God declared, “I am the LORD, and there is no other; apart from me there is no God” (Isaiah 45:5).

The God of Israel was understood to be eternal, immaterial, omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent, and perfectly good. These are not properties material deities could possess.

That raises an obvious question. If Christians inherited this uncompromising belief in one God, how did they arrive at the doctrine of the Trinity?

John opens his Gospel with these words: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1).

John then tells us that all things were made through the Word. The Word is distinguished from God, yet the Word is also called God. John 1:3 says all created things came into existence through Him. If all created things were made through the Word, then the Word Himself cannot belong to the class of created things.

Then John tells us, “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us” (John 1:14). The eternal Son of God became incarnate as Jesus Christ.

RELATED: Don’t let ‘Disclosure Day’ doom you to spiritual death by discourse

The New Testament repeatedly presents the same pattern. At Jesus’ baptism, the Son stands in the water, the Spirit descends as a dove, and the Father speaks from heaven. The three are clearly distinguished from one another, yet elsewhere in Scripture the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each identified as God.

Jesus commanded His disciples to baptize “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19). Baptism is done in the name of God. Paul gives a Trinitarian benediction in 2 Corinthians 13:14. Jesus, the Lamb of God, sits on the throne of God.

Jesus also claimed an existence that preceded Abraham: “Before Abraham was, I am” (John 8:58). His words echo the divine name revealed to Moses. The Jews understood the implication and tried to stone Him for blasphemy. Elsewhere, they accused Him of making Himself equal with God.

Scripture also attributes personal qualities to the Holy Spirit. The Spirit teaches, speaks, guides, gives life, and can be grieved. He is not merely an impersonal force.

The early Christians therefore found themselves committed to three truths taught by Scripture:

There is only one God.The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God.The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct from one another.

Deny any one of those truths, and you contradict the Bible.

Over the first several centuries, as pagan polytheists converted to Christianity or challenged it, the church debated how best to explain the doctrine of God from Scripture.

The Gnostics denied that Jesus was truly incarnate. They taught that He was a spirit who only appeared human. In doing so, they denied the incarnation.

Another early controversy involved Sabellius, who taught what later became known as modalism. According to this view, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are merely different manifestations of the same divine person.

The church rejected this because Scripture repeatedly distinguishes the Father, Son, and Spirit from one another.

Then came Arius, who taught that the Father alone is eternal and that the Son is the first and greatest creature.

As Christians reflected on the biblical evidence, the church clarified its teaching: The Father is eternally unbegotten. The Son is eternally begotten of the Father. The Holy Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father and, in Western theology, from the Father and the Son.

The doctrine can be summarized simply: God is one “what” — one divine essence — and three “whos” — three distinct persons.

The church eventually summarized the biblical teaching as one God in three persons. Not one God and three gods. Not one person appearing in three forms. One God, three persons.

RELATED: Contentious theological debate erupts about Mormons over War Department faith list

Brent Asay/iStock/Getty Images

The doctrine of the Trinity is therefore not an arbitrary invention. Nor is it a concession to polytheism. It is precisely the opposite: a refutation of polytheism. The doctrine preserves the full teaching of Scripture and answers the questions Scripture itself forces us to ask about God.

What is striking is how often modern religious movements that spin off from Christianity repeat ancient errors. Some deny the full deity of Christ, as Arius did. Others collapse the distinctions among the persons, as Sabellius did. Still others deny Christ’s full humanity or full deity. Some even teach polytheistic material gods.

What has united Christians across denominations and centuries is their shared commitment to the biblical doctrine of God. By contrast, new religious movements often claim allegiance to Scripture while introducing another authority that corrects, supplements, or supersedes it.

When Jesus called people to believe in Him, He did not require them to master centuries of theological debate. But neither did He leave them free to invent their own Jesus. They were to believe true things about Him and reject false things about Him.

A person may sincerely use the name “Jesus” while holding beliefs about Him that contradict the Jesus revealed in Scripture. The issue is not sincerity but identity. Not, “What do I feel?” but, “What does the Bible say?”

The question is whether the Jesus a person believes in is the Jesus revealed in the Bible or a Jesus drawn from some other source.

The church’s long debates about the Trinity were not abstract philosophical exercises. They were answers to the most important question any person can ask: Who is Jesus Christ in the Bible?

​Bible, Christianity, Doctrine, Genesis, God, Jesus christ, Old testament, Opinion & analysis, Trinity, New testament, Faith