Category: blaze media

If COVID-19 nearly broke civilization with a 1% fatality rate, can you imagine the pandemonium a more lethal pathogen would cause? According to national security journalist Annie Jacobsen — author of “Biological War: A Scenario” — society should be reckoning with that very question because genetically modified pathogens with a 100% kill rate are sitting in laboratories right now.

In an interview with Glenn Beck, Jacobsen explained that these pathogens aren’t theoretical — and that a real-world release would move far faster and more destructively than most people grasp.

The prospect of a pandemic that makes COVID-19 look like child’s play terrifies Glenn — not just because of the lethal implications of such an event but also because society has never been so skeptical of the government and institutionalized science.

If something truly deadly escaped, how many would even believe it?

“The trust is gone. It’s just gone,” Glenn says. “If an outbreak happened today, half of the country would not believe Donald Trump. If it was … Kamala Harris, half of the country would not believe her.”

And then there’s the people who are so jaded, it doesn’t matter who’s in office — “they don’t trust the science,” Glenn says, because COVID-19 mistakes still have never been owned by the scientific authorities.

These skeptics, justified as their mistrust may be, would be in peril, however, if an invariably fatal pathogen were to escape.

“There are genetically modified pathogens out there that have a 100% case fatality rate. Everybody dies. And [in the book] I show readers what the government has planned for that kind of event,” Jacobsen says.

“I take the readers from outbreak to anarchy in six days … and then you learn what happens after anarchy,” she adds.

“How convinced are you that we are near … an accident in one of these labs?” Glenn asks.

“[Biological] accidents are listed in Defense Department nomenclature as having the same plan go into effect as an attack. … So, a lab leak 100% is as deadly as an attack because the pathogen, if it’s airborne, the weapon system is the human lung set,” Jacobsen explains.

Glenn then pivots to gain-of-function research.

“I understand if we’re looking for, you know, cures for these weapons, but I just don’t know — it feels as though we have crossed a point to where we’re almost insane and will appear to be suicidal at some point down the road,” he says.

“You can’t use any of these biological weapons. It’s all against the law since Nixon, but how many countries are still doing this stuff?” he asks.

To understand just how prevalent gain-of-function research is, all you have to do, Jacobsen says, is “look at the labs.”

“There are 110 BSL-4 labs around the world. That’s the maximum containment lab. And BSL-3, by the way, is just right below that. You can work with plague, hantavirus, anthrax, rabies in a BSL-3 lab, and there are 3,500 of those labs around the world,” she explains.

“And so, the idea of an accident is, you know, we’re just right at that precipice.”

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.

​Anthrax, Covid-19, Glenn beck, Hantavirus, National security, Pandemic, Pathogen, Rabies, Nixon, Gain of function research, Blazetv show 

When President Trump reposted a video featuring President John F. Kennedy warning about subversion in America, he renewed focus on a threat we have long ignored at our peril.

Spotlighting JFK’s admonition is part of the administration’s all-out attack on foreign subversion — an effort that has no presidential precedent. Its designation of Antifa and certain Muslim Brotherhood chapters as terrorist organizations was a first. The revocation of visas for foreign subversives, if carried out on a larger scale, will be unmatched in scope.

Kennedy understood that peace through strength was broader than deploying military power or international diplomacy. But he never had the chance to deliver that warning.

During the July 16 Ministerial on the Resurgence of Political Terrorism, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and other officials made clear that the Trump administration would use every tool of statecraft to dismantle the decades-old subversive networks operating in the United States.

This effort has also refocused attention on an older — but no less potent — enemy: communist subversion.

The State Department published a 100-page report “Cuba: The Capital of 21st-Century Communism,” detailing how Cuban communists have worked for decades to overthrow the United States. It names names, past and present.

Cuba, of course, brings us back to President Kennedy. Despite his failed effort to remove Fidel Castro’s communist regime, Kennedy frequently pointed out how communists abused constitutional protections and infiltrated U.S. institutions — the news media, labor unions, academia, and the government itself.

JFK’s words still apply today to surviving Soviet spin-offs like the Cuban regime, critical theory and critical race theory, cultural Marxism, and democratic socialism.

As a new senator, at the height of Wisconsin Republican Sen. Joseph McCarthy’s investigative hearings, Kennedy warned in successive speeches that the greatest foreign threat would rely on “the weapons of subversion, economic disintegration, and guerrilla warfare to accomplish our destruction, rather than the direct assault of an all-out war.”

Kennedy warned every possible audience — schoolteachers, university professors, community leaders, newspaper editors, women’s clubs, union leaders, military personnel, veterans, business groups, political fundraisers, civil liberties leaders, church groups, and the general public — about the communist threat right up to the last day of his life.

Kennedy recognized the danger posed by American traitors who sought, through subterfuge and collaboration with the foreign enemy, to corrode Americans’ belief in their country and the principles of their nation’s founding. He praised some American labor unions for ridding themselves of communist subversion.

Defending President Eisenhower’s counter-subversion approach in 1957, Kennedy nonetheless chided his fractured and squabbling Republican opponents. Republicans, he said, “found that their chief concern was with questions of disloyalty and subversion — not within the Federal Government but within the Republican Party.”

That was just three weeks to the day after Joe McCarthy’s death. JFK never publicly criticized McCarthy, who had been a welcome guest of his father at the Kennedy Compound on Cape Cod. “Half my people in Massachusetts look on McCarthy as a hero,” he once said.

RELATED: The socialists are coming for the Senate

Kid-a/Getty Images

Infiltration and subversion

Kennedy repeatedly warned of what he called “nonmilitary avenues of Soviet advance”: “I fear our emphasis on the dangers of missile attacks may cause us to forget. For their thrust is more subtle,” and “the task of opposing them more formidable.”

Among those threats were “economic and political penetration, intimidation, and subversion,” he said in 1958. “There is little value in rushing new billions in defense expenditures to fight total wars … if we are unprepared to prevent continued Soviet advances through … subversion and intimidation.”

As he was preparing his presidential run, Kennedy mused during a speech at a civil liberties conference that the public had been so subjected to subversive attacks that they no longer shared the civic principles that once united them.

On the campaign trail in 1960, Kennedy raised the topic of subversion even before audiences asked about it. As the Democratic nominee for president, Kennedy became more critical of the Eisenhower administration for focusing on massive military buildups at the expense of a predictable pattern of communist ideological conquest made easier by America’s weakness in counter-subversion:

In other words, there is every chance that the pattern of conquest of the communists will not be military action, but will be by subversion, by fear, by persuading the people of those countries and their leaders that the communist system represents the way of the future. I don’t believe the administration has recognized that danger. … I don’t believe that our influence has increased as fast in recent years abroad as that of the communists.

In his last weeks of campaigning, Kennedy even called the communist threat more challenging than dealing with the Nazis. “I must say that the problems we will face in the next 10 years are far more complex than any that Franklin Roosevelt or Harry Truman faced, particularly in the field of foreign policy,” he said to supporters in Ohio. “What has happened in the last two years in the field of foreign policy indicates a whole technique of subversion and infiltration, which will be extremely hard to counter.”

That subversion, he continued, “will require a far great[er] subtlety, far more constant vigilance, far greater personnel, far greater foresight than we have ever shown before.”

Unaware of President Eisenhower’s plan for toppling the new Fidel Castro regime that he would inherit, Kennedy tore into U.S. unpreparedness that led to Cuba becoming “a base from which to carry communist infiltration and subversion throughout the Americas.”

Kennedy was alone in bringing up subversion during his fourth debate with Vice President Richard M. Nixon, which was striking since Nixon had become a national political figure while serving on the House Un-American Activities Committee.

What you can do

Kennedy hammered away at the threat of communist subversion in the first minutes of his presidency. In his inaugural address, he vowed “to oppose aggression or subversion anywhere in the Americas” — the same speech in which he said, “Ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country.”

He warned in a 1961 emergency address to Congress that “nuclear weapons cannot prevent subversion.”

He and his brother, Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, had no love for FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, but they worked closely with him to investigate and disrupt communist infiltration of the civil rights movement. JFK, like Eisenhower before him and Lyndon Johnson and Nixon afterward, treated it properly as a counterintelligence problem.

On the day of his assassination in Dallas, President Kennedy was ready once again to warn about subversion. The president’s remarks as prepared read:

I want to discuss with you today the status of our strength and our society because this question clearly calls for the most responsible qualities of leadership and the most enlightened products of scholarship. For this nation’s strength and security are not easily or cheaply obtained, nor are they quickly and simply explained. There are many kinds of strength and no one kind will suffice. Overwhelming nuclear strength cannot stop a guerrilla war. Formal pacts of alliance cannot stop internal subversion.

Kennedy understood that peace through strength was broader than deploying military power or international diplomacy.

But he never had the chance to deliver that warning. More than six decades later, President Trump and his team have fortunately picked up where he left off, reviving a neglected part of Kennedy’s legacy. It’s time to follow President Kennedy’s lead and uproot domestic subversion in America once and for all.

Editor’s note: This article appeared originally at the American Mind.

​Antifa, Critical race theory, Cuba, Democratic socialism, Fidel castro, John f kennedy, Joseph mccarthy, Opinion & analysis, Donald trump, Marco rubio 

Surveillance video from a Georgia gas station captured a scary scene late last month — a male chasing a child around a car while the child’s mother was pumping gas.

It all played out after midnight at a Shell station on Delk Road in Marietta, WSB-TV reported.

‘The million-dollar question everyone watching is going to ask: Why did this happen? Why did this occur? And we don’t know those answers.’

Video shows a shoeless, shirtless male approaching the car, the station said. While he eventually walks away, the male returns to the car, WSB said.

The male this time walks closer to the mother but notices a child jumping to the driver’s seat and exiting the car, the station said.

The video then shows the male chasing the child.

At one point, the male is seen opening the car’s back door where the mother’s other child was seated, WSB said.

The mother then holds up the gas pump nozzle and gestures toward the male as he backs away, which gives her child time to get back into the car, the station said, adding that two witnesses appear in the frame and help.

RELATED: Heroic gas station clerk saves girl from sex offender amid alleged kidnapping after she mouths desperate plea to him

“The actions of the mother and everyone on the scene, their ability to remain calm under pressure and … get him away from the children, get a hold of us so that we can get to the area allowed us to hold this individual accountable,” Public Information Officer Charles McPhilamy of the Marietta Police Department told WSB.

The suspect, Jerahn Tucker, was arrested on three charges, including attempted kidnapping, the station said.

Police told the station they found a THC vape in Tucker’s car when they caught up to him.

The gas station manager added to WSB that he’s kicked Tucker off the property multiple times.

“The million-dollar question everyone watching is going to ask: Why did this happen? Why did this occur? And we don’t know those answers,” McPhilamy added to the station.

Jail records Blaze News reviewed Friday indicate Tucker was still behind bars.

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

​Georgia, Attempted kidnapping, Arrest, Gas station, Mother and child, Fighting back, Crime 

America’s debate over poverty has undergone a remarkable and troubling transformation. Two centuries ago, the central challenge was persuading needy people to accept public assistance. Today, the challenge is preventing people from fraudulently claiming benefits to which they were never entitled.

That trajectory tells us something profound about the nation’s changing moral culture.

What had once been viewed as a last resort gradually came to be seen as an entitlement detached from personal responsibility.

Alexis de Tocqueville noticed something remarkable when he traveled through America in the early 1830s. Unlike Europe, where poverty often produced permanent dependence upon the state or aristocratic patrons, Americans possessed an almost universal determination to remain independent. They formed voluntary associations to care for neighbors in distress, but they regarded prolonged dependence as inconsistent with the character of a free citizen.

That observation reflected a broader understanding shared by the American founders and the generation that followed them.

Every state maintained some provision for public relief, but it was deliberately limited and administered locally. It existed for those genuinely incapable of caring for themselves — the disabled, widows, orphans, and others facing extraordinary hardship. Families, churches, fraternal organizations, and private charities bore the primary responsibility for helping the poor.

Public charity carried a social stigma — not because Americans lacked compassion, but because they believed that independence was itself a form of human dignity.

Justice Joseph Story explained that republican government depended upon a virtuous and independent citizenry. The ideal citizen governed himself before participating in governing others. Economic independence fostered political independence; citizens who could support themselves were less susceptible to manipulation by those dispensing favors or public largesse.

One of the striking features of early America is not that assistance was unavailable, but that many people who qualified for relief were reluctant to seek it.

Contemporary accounts from several states — including New Jersey — describe respectable men and women enduring extraordinary hardship before accepting public charity. To modern ears, such reluctance may seem irrational. To them, it was a matter of preserving self-respect.

That moral instinct — that accepting public assistance should be exceptional rather than ordinary — formed an essential part of the American understanding of citizenship until the 20th century.

The first cracks in that understanding appeared during the Progressive Era and deepened during the New Deal. Faced with industrialization, urban poverty, and the Great Depression, Americans increasingly looked to government to perform functions that earlier generations had entrusted to institutions outside the government.

Much of that expansion responded to genuine crises, and programs such as Social Security reflected the extraordinary circumstances of their time.

Even so, the nation’s underlying philosophy was beginning to change. Government was no longer viewed simply as a safety net for those unable to care for themselves; it increasingly became expected to solve all social and economic problems.

The shift was gradual and often justified by necessity. But it subtly weakened the older assumption that public assistance should remain exceptional, temporary, and closely tied to preserving personal independence.

RELATED: 1776, not 1608: What the Supreme Court got wrong on birthright citizenship

Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call Inc./Getty Images

Then came the Great Society, which transformed that gradual evolution into a new governing philosophy.

It was no longer enough for government to provide a backstop against destitution. Washington now assumed responsibility for eliminating poverty itself, dramatically expanding both the scope of public assistance and the expectation that government would provide it.

Lyndon Johnson’s anti-poverty initiatives promised not merely to relieve poverty, but to eradicate it. The federal government assumed responsibilities that had traditionally rested with families, churches, private charities, and local communities. Welfare increasingly became not an emergency measure but a permanent feature of American life.

Though the Great Society’s architects believed they were expanding compassion, they failed to appreciate that they were also reshaping character. As benefits expanded and eligibility became more complex, government increasingly rewarded dependency rather than independence. Bureaucracies grew. Incentives shifted. Entire industries arose to help people maximize government benefits rather than minimize their reliance upon them.

Most importantly, the moral understanding surrounding public assistance changed.

What had once been viewed as a last resort gradually came to be seen as an entitlement detached from personal responsibility. The question shifted from “Do I truly need help?” to “What benefits can I qualify for?”

Today, we appear to have entered yet another stage.

The headlines are filled not merely with dependency, but with outright theft. Fraudulent unemployment claims. Identity theft used to obtain government benefits. Organized criminal enterprises exploiting Medicare and Medicaid. Billions of dollars in pandemic relief stolen through fake applications and fictitious businesses. International criminal organizations siphoning taxpayer dollars from programs intended to help struggling Americans.

In state after state, investigators have uncovered elaborate schemes involving food assistance, housing subsidies, disability payments, and health care reimbursements.

That is not to say that every welfare recipient is dishonest or even dependent. The overwhelming majority of Americans who receive public assistance are law-abiding citizens, many facing genuine hardship. But a system that steadily weakens the connection between work and reward inevitably creates opportunities — and temptations — for abuse.

RELATED: Will America need a Caesar?

Chudakov2/iStock/Getty Images

Once government benefits come to be viewed less as charity for the truly needy than as a pot of money available for the taking, the moral barrier separating dependence from outright fraud begins to erode.

No society can long endure when the distinction between earning and taking begins to disappear. The welfare state ultimately depends upon trust: trust that recipients are honest, that taxpayers will continue to support programs for those in genuine need, and that government will faithfully safeguard the public treasury. Rampant fraud destroys each of those assumptions.

The greatest victims are often the truly needy. Every dollar stolen by fraudsters is a dollar unavailable to a disabled veteran, a struggling single mother, or an elderly widow living on a fixed income. Every scandal further erodes public confidence in programs that exist for legitimate purposes.

Reforming welfare therefore requires more than better auditing, modernized computer systems, or tougher prosecutors, although all of those are necessary. It requires recovering an older understanding of citizenship.

The founders recognized something that modern policymakers have too often forgotten: Independence is a political virtue. Citizens capable of supporting themselves are more capable of governing themselves. A republic cannot flourish if large portions of the population come to regard government not as the protector of liberty, but as the primary provider of livelihood.

America’s success has historically rested primarily on the character of its people, not on government programs.

Our national journey — from dignity to welfare dependence to thievery — was not inevitable, and it is not irreversible. The same nation that once prized independence above comfort can recover that ethic.

But doing so will require us to remember what earlier generations instinctively understood: There is a profound difference between helping a neighbor in genuine need and constructing a system that slowly erodes the very virtues upon which a free people depend.

Compassion remains indispensable. But so do dignity, self-reliance, and personal responsibility. Lose those, and we will discover that the greatest poverty afflicting America is no longer material. It is moral.

Editor’s note: This article appeared originally at the American Mind.

​Great society, Social security, Personal responsibility, Welfare state, American founding, Charity, Benefits, Public assistance, Government programs, Opinion & analysis, Fraud, Alexis de tocqueville, Joseph story 

Journee McGrew says the man she brutally murdered with a metal hammer had groomed and molested her since the time she was in elementary school.

The 22-year-old woman is awaiting sentencing for beating 41-year-old Waduta Londrell Woodley to death on July 2, 2025, in Jacksonville, Florida.

‘I really wasn’t in my right mind when this happened. I’m not violent, and I’m sorry for this situation.’

McGrew said Woodley had sexually molested her for many years before she left him in a pool of blood in the breezeway of an apartment complex. Police said he had blunt force trauma to his head and face.

They also found a paper on his chest with a message that read, “PEDO Touches Children.”

McGrew said in court that her plan was to lure him into her apartment by falsely claiming to want sex in order to gather evidence against him. She said she did not plan to kill him.

“This was not supposed to happen. I really wasn’t in my right mind when this happened. I’m not violent, and I’m sorry for this situation,” she testified.

Police said they knocked on her door and she answered. They found bloody footprints as well as the bloody hammer.

Woodley’s mother testified at trial on his behalf.

“Everything changed in a second when your only son has been murdered,” she said in court. “Yes, this has affected my family, my daughter, my granddaughter. … We don’t know how to cope.”

McGrew also testified that she had been diagnosed with psychosis and post-traumatic stress disorder before the murder.

She initially pleaded not guilty to the two charges but changed her plea to guilty in Dec. 2025. She will be sentenced in August. The state has recommended life in prison.

“McGrew decided last year to be judge, jury, and executioner,” the state said. “She decided she was going to take the law into her own hands. She decided to be a vigilante, to be retaliatory and to impose a sentence.”

WJXT-TV reported that Woodley had no criminal history related to sexual assault or the abuse of children.

McGrew’s mugshot shows her smiling happily after she was arrested.

RELATED: Family of 10-year-old girl allegedly tortured to death says child protective services ignored dozens of warnings

McGrew was asked if she had any comments for her victim’s family.

“I am sorry about what I did,” she said. “I know how much I impacted your family and mine. I’m really sorry for what happened.”

No one appears to have submitted anything for Woodley’s obituary. The staff of the funeral home planted a tree in his memory.

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

​Brutal beating, Child molestation, Florida, Revenge, Child grooming, Crime 

You probably think the EV mandate is over. That’s exactly what Washington wants you to believe.

Congress celebrated. The White House touted what it called one of the largest deregulatory efforts in modern history, highlighting the repeal of federal vehicle emissions rules as the centerpiece of more than $1 trillion in projected savings. Automakers began telling investors they were pivoting back toward the vehicles customers actually want. Dealers finally saw hope after years of trying to move electric vehicles that many buyers simply didn’t want.

Gas-powered vehicles continued dominating large parts of the country because they remain practical, affordable, and easy to refuel.

‘Not yet’

Then I started talking to people who follow automotive policy for a living.

I kept hearing the same answer: “Not yet.”

The reason is California.

While Washington rolled back federal emissions rules, California’s authority to set stricter vehicle emissions standards largely survived. Seventeen states and the District of Columbia now follow California’s rules, representing roughly 40% of the nation’s new-vehicle market. That means one state’s policies can effectively shape what automakers build for the entire country.

The fight now centers on four California Clean Air Act waivers that allow the state to enforce stricter emissions standards, including requirements that automakers sell increasing numbers of electric vehicles and meet tougher tailpipe-emissions limits. The EPA sent those waivers to Congress for review under the Congressional Review Act. California immediately sued, arguing the waivers aren’t subject to congressional repeal.

Congressional Republicans disagree.

California king

They’re racing to overturn the waivers before the Congressional Review Act deadline expires. If they succeed, future administrations would face a much steeper legal hurdle before restoring California’s authority. If they fail, the legal framework that has allowed California to shape the national auto market could remain in place for years.

To be fair, the Trump administration fundamentally changed federal auto policy. Repealing the EPA’s greenhouse gas endangerment finding removed the legal foundation for nationwide greenhouse-gas regulations, marking one of the biggest deregulatory shifts in decades.

But Washington only dismantled part of the system.

Once enough states adopt California’s standards, automakers face a simple business decision. They can engineer different vehicles for different parts of the country — or build to the toughest standard and sell it everywhere. Guess which option usually wins.

RELATED: California wants to decide what tires you can buy — what could possibly go wrong?

Bloomberg/Getty Images

Sunk costs

Now follow the money.

Over the last decade, automakers invested hundreds of billions of dollars preparing for an electric future regulators insisted was inevitable. Battery manufacturers expanded production. Charging companies attracted billions in public and private investment. Utilities planned for rising electricity demand. Entire business models were built around the assumption that government would continue pushing rapid electrification.

When that much money depends on one regulatory direction, nobody quietly accepts a change in course.

Businesses fight to protect their investments. Lobbyists fight to preserve the policies that created them. Investors fight to protect their returns. That’s not a conspiracy. It’s economics.

Consumers, however, had other ideas.

Real life over regulations

Electric vehicle sales in America never matched many of the industry’s most ambitious forecasts. Hybrids surged because they offered better fuel economy without requiring people to change how they live. Gas-powered vehicles continued dominating large parts of the country because they remain practical, affordable, and easy to refuel. Dealers struggled with inventory that reflected regulatory priorities more than consumer demand, and manufacturers wrote off billions after investing ahead of the market.

None of this means electric vehicles are a bad option. Buy one if it fits your lifestyle. Buy a hybrid if that’s the better option. Buy a gasoline-powered pickup if that’s what your family or business needs.

That’s what consumer choice looks like.

Looking back over the last decade, I don’t see consumers driving this transition. I see regulations shaping investment, investment shaping production, and production shaping what buyers were offered in the showroom.

That’s a very different sequence.

Washington may have dismantled the federal EV mandate. But unless Congress also closes California’s regulatory back door, the pressure that reshaped the auto industry could return under a future administration.

The question isn’t whether electric vehicles have a future. They do.

The question is whether consumers or regulators get to decide how quickly that future arrives.

​Auto industry, California, Clean air act, Electric vehicles, Epa, Ev mandate, Congressional review act, Gavin newsom, Automotive 

New York has long styled itself as a national champion of tolerance and individual freedom. Yet when it comes to one of the oldest civil liberties in American life — the freedom to live according to one’s conscience — the Empire State is moving in the opposite direction.

The 2026 Religious Liberty in the States index, a data-driven investigation published by the Center for Religion, Culture & Democracy, measures how hard state governments work to protect the basic right of conscience. New York, it seems, works overtime to achieve the exact opposite.

A genuinely civilized society accommodates honest differences rather than requiring total ideological agreement.

Dead last

The index measures the everyday points where state power clashes with religious conviction. Can a nurse refuse to assist in genetic counseling that conflicts with her faith? Can a Seventh-day Adventist opt out of mandatory union dues that finance causes he considers morally objectionable? Are citizens safe from religious bias at their local bank, state university, or public school board?

On those fundamental questions, New York performs worse than every other state in the nation. The latest edition places New York dead last — 50th out of 50.

The ranking reflects a governing philosophy that rejects religious liberty whenever it conflicts with progressive policy goals. Rather than treating conscience protections as a cornerstone of a pluralistic society, state leaders regard them as obstacles to be managed or even eliminated. With Zohran Mamdani and his political allies continuing to push an aggressive far-left agenda, protections for religious beliefs are increasingly treated as hazardous waste requiring active containment.

RELATED: Euthanasia and the lie of the ‘good death’

Mininyx Doodle/Getty Images

Death drive

The ranking isn’t merely academic. On the very day the report was released, four orders of Catholic nuns and several Catholic health care ministries were back in federal court challenging New York’s assisted-suicide law, arguing that it would force them to violate their religious convictions by participating in the process of ending patients’ lives.

Backed by the religious liberty legal group Becket, the plaintiffs in Carmelite Sisters for the Aged and Infirm v. James had asked the court to block the law before it takes effect on Aug. 5. On Friday, they won an important early victory when New York agreed not to enforce the law against the ministries while the case proceeds. Without that protection, the plaintiffs argued, religious health care providers who refused to facilitate assisted suicide could face steep financial penalties, the loss of professional licenses, and even criminal prosecution.

At the same time the RLS rankings were published, four orders of Catholic nuns and several Catholic health care ministries filed a federal lawsuit challenging New York’s newest assisted-suicide law. Their complaint centers on being forced to participate in ending human life in violation of their faith.

The most vulnerable

For generations, Catholic ministries throughout New York have cared for the most vulnerable. The Carmelite Sisters for the Aged and Infirm, the Dominican Sisters of Hawthorne, the Missionary Sisters of St. Benedict, and the Little Sisters of the Poor have devoted decades to serving the sick, the elderly, and the dying. They believe that every human life has inherent dignity and requires loving care until the very end.

The state’s legal arm operates with total disregard for that history. When the New York Court of Appeals decided Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Albany v. Serio in 2006, forcing religious employers to pay for prescription contraceptive coverage in their health plans, the court established a precedent that statutory mandates routinely override religious objections. The current assisted-suicide mandate pushes that line of warped logic into literal life-and-death territory.

The First Amendment exists precisely because early Americans recognized that government inevitably abuses power when it forces citizens to violate their deepest beliefs as the price of participating in public life. In 1786, Thomas Jefferson drafted the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, declaring that “to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical.” That principle laid the foundation for the American constitutional order.

Existential fight

That standard served the country remarkably well for over two centuries. Religious hospitals, schools, charities, adoption agencies, and social service organizations routinely fill massive gaps that state agencies lack the administrative capacity to manage. These groups strengthen their communities precisely because they stay true to their values. Forcing them to compromise those values undermines their work and ultimately leaves the most vulnerable with nowhere else to turn.

Supporters of New York’s policies claim that eliminating religious exemptions promotes equality. But that is utter nonsense. Equality achieved through state coercion inevitably creates an oppressive, standardized public square. A genuinely civilized society accommodates honest differences rather than requiring total ideological agreement.

The assisted-suicide litigation now before the federal courts represents the latest collision in this existential fight. Government forces operating with zero regulatory pushback tend to expand their reach until an independent judiciary steps in to draw a hard line.

The expansion of state power at the expense of individual conscience should alarm every reader. Today’s regulatory target is a collection of Catholic nuns running eldercare facilities. Tomorrow, the same administrative apparatus could target another faith community, another profession, or another belief system that conflicts with the prevailing political orthodoxy.

Religious liberty serves an essential purpose in the United States. It prevents state power from controlling what you think and how you live. Let’s hope these sisters win their legal challenge. Because a win for them is a win for the everyday, decent American.

​Catholic ministries, Catholic nuns, Civil liberties, First amendment, Individual freedom, New york, Public life, Religious freedom, Religious liberty, Assisted suicide law, Euthanasia, Lifestyle, Faith 

BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales is passionate about protecting American culture — and that includes the roadside fever dream that is Buc-ee’s gas station.

“They have a HomeGoods store. They sell barbecue. They have beef jerky. They have everything you could ever want and the cleanest freaking restrooms you’ll ever see in your life. Like, Buc-ee’s is a national treasure,” she gushes.

But it seems not everyone shares Sara’s love for the Texas-sized travel center. British-American comedian John Oliver devoted a segment of his show “Last Week Tonight” to criticizing Buc-ee’s for suing smaller businesses over trademark issues involving beaver imagery and similar names. He even launched a parody “Buc-Off” merch line featuring a squirrel mascot and dared the chain to sue him.

“Buc-ee’s should be careful here because as one legal expert has said, ‘The more you do this, the more you might run into somebody who has the means or the will to fight with you about.’ That is where we come in because it turns out we very much have the will to get into a fight with Buc-ee’s,” Oliver said, before debuting his new “Buc-Off” brand and merch line.

“If any gas station chain out there has an issue with our new logo and products and wants to get lawyers involved, then you know what? Bring it the f**k on,” he taunted.

Calling Oliver a “British clown,” Sara retorts, “Imagine having so little material that you’re like, ‘You know what I’m going to do? I’m going to pick a fight with Buc-ee’s’ … Over what? Buc-ee’s protecting their own IP?”

“He’s saying indirectly he’s supporting small companies that are trying to profit off of Buc-ee’s image and likeness by imitating a successful brand,” she adds.

Sara sees Oliver’s stunt as yet another attempt by a foreigner to destroy American culture.

“I find it very offensive he’s going to come into my country and speak the way that he speaks and go after one of the biggest national treasures in this entire country,” she says.

But it’s not just offensive — it’s hypocritical too.

“Let me just show you, John Oliver, your own parent company — the company that owns HBO, where you can find his sh***y program. Warner Brothers Discovery sued an AI firm for Batman Superman copyright infringement,” Sara points out.

“So rules for thee, but not for me,” she quips.

To hear more, watch the episode above.

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara’s no-holds-barred takes on news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Bucees, Comedian, Last week tonight, Sara gonzales, Blazetv show, John oliver 

At least one sheriff in New York state is pushing back against a new law forcing law enforcement agencies to stop cooperating with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Democratic New York Governor Kathy Hochul and Attorney General Letitia James issued an order on July 24 requiring 12 local law enforcement agencies to terminate their agreements with ICE.

‘All I can say about immigration-related issues is that if there is a very dangerous person in this jail, and the expectation is that I’m going to release that person back out into the community, I’m not doing that.’

Broome County Sheriff Fred Akshar excoriated the order in a media briefing where he called politicians in the state capital hypocrites.

“It is becoming increasingly … frustrating, you know, to listen to the edicts and, you know, the white noise coming from, again, the political class in Albany,” Akshar said. “I would like to think that the vast majority of New Yorkers understand that the political class in Albany continues to destroy the great state of New York.”

Akshar said he would have to comply with the law ending 287(g) programs in the state by Aug. 25 but indicated that he would continue to cooperate with ICE in other ways.

“And you have policy after policy after policy as it pertains to public safety that continues to put criminals over law-abiding New Yorkers,” he added. “And that is frustrating. So the reality is this: Whether or not I agree or disagree with a law that has been authored by the legislature and signed by the governor, my responsibility is to enforce the law.”

RELATED: Dem. Gov. Hochul says NY college campuses will be offered as emergency shelters for NYC illegal immigrants

“All I can say about immigration-related issues is that if there is a very dangerous person in this jail, and the expectation is that I’m going to release that person back out into the community, I’m not doing that,” he added.

Broome County is located in the Southern Tier of the state and includes about 195,000 residents.

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

​Law enforcement, New york, Sheriffs, Illegal immigration, Immigration and customs enforcement, Politics 

Spanish authorities say at least 34 people have died during the sudden and startling invasion of the tiny Spanish territory of Ceuta in Morocco.

Reports initially said thousands of people were overrunning the small province in northern Africa, but authorities have since said that the invasion grew to tens of thousands of migrants.

‘Ceuta is a Spanish city, and what happened yesterday deserves our full reproach, our condemnation at the strongest possible level of rejection, condemnation and consideration as deplorable.’

Spain’s Ministry of the Interior said about 25,000 migrants had been expelled from Ceuta back to Morocco and 150 migrants were being removed per minute.

Ceuta’s president, Juan Jesús Vivas, said about 60,000 migrants had overrun the province and also reported the official number of those dead so far.

He went on to call the situation “absolutely unsustainable” and criticized the government’s response as action “taken too late and insufficiently.”

Despite the claims of the interior ministry, some videos on social media apparently show the migrants continuing to stream in while troops look on.

Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez referred to the invasion as an “attack” on his country and “a violation of Spain’s territorial integrity” at a news conference Friday.

“Ceuta is a Spanish city, and what happened yesterday deserves our full reproach, our condemnation at the strongest possible level of rejection, condemnation and consideration as deplorable.”

RELATED: Mamdani vows to protect migrants in apparent DEFIANCE of Supreme Court ruling on TPS

Adri Salido/Getty Images

Some suspect that the invasion was sparked by a Spanish Supreme Court decision which found that migrants crossing by land could be expelled without due process, but those who entered the country by sea required documentation before they were deported.

The U.S. State Dept. also issued a statement decrying the illegal crossings into Spain.

“The United States stands with the people of Spain, and all Europeans, against this egregious violation of their sovereignty and human rights,” the statement read.

“This unacceptable incident is the direct result of the Spanish Government’s deliberate efforts to enable and facilitate mass illegal migration into Europe,” the agency added. “We are considering actions to defend Americans at home and abroad from this threat and stand ready to assist other European allies considering similar options.”

RELATED: ‘Absolute chaos’: THOUSANDS of migrants OVERRUN border into Spain from Morocco — at least 9 people dead

France 24 reported that most of the migrants were Moroccan and were seeking jobs in Europe. Migrants told them it took up to four hours to swim into Ceuta from Morocco.

A local workers’ association leader told CBS News it had become a major humanitarian crisis with thousands of migrants, including unaccompanied children, sleeping in parks and on the sidewalks.

Sánchez accused “human trafficking mafias” of exploiting the ruling by the Supreme Court.

“This demands one of the strongest condemnations, particularly of the human trafficking mafias that deceive many young people, many of whom find death, whether in the ocean or at this border,” he added.

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

​Mass migration, Europe, Spain, Morocco, Invasion, Politics, Ceuta 

This week, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson discussed with Michelle Obama, of all people, the importance of justices appearing impartial — and so far, the reactions to their conversation have been just about what you’d expect.

She told the hosts on the Wednesday episode of “IMO with Michelle Obama & Craig Robinson” that “we all have to believe that there is a judicial system that is going to be fair, that is going to be neutral, that when you bring your dispute to the court, that judge doesn’t have any pre-existing stake in the particular issue.”

‘Can’t make this up.’

It’s a surprising take, considering Jackson’s background.

For one thing, former President Joe Biden explicitly chose Jackson for the Supreme Court on the basis of her race and sex, though she said during her confirmation hearing that she could not define “woman” because she’s “not a biologist.”

Jackson has also made a habit of penning bias-saturated jeremiads that have in some cases been extreme enough to raise the eyebrows of even other liberals on the bench. For instance, she:

insinuated in her lone dissenting opinion in Trump v. American Federation of Government Employees that President Donald Trump was some sort of power-hungry menace and that those on the bench who failed to stop his “wrecking ball” were sycophantic enablers whose decision was both “hubristic and senseless”;claimed in her dissenting opinion for Trump v. CASA Inc. that the Trump administration’s request to address universal injunctions — which the high court found “likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts” — amounted to a request “to engage in unlawful behavior”;accused her colleagues in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard of “let-them-eat-cake obliviousness” for their colorblind approach and claimed that race-based college admissions address “the well-documented ‘intergenerational transmission of inequality’ that still plagues our citizenry” to the “benefit of us all”; andechoed LGBT ideologues in her lone dissenting opinion in Chiles v. Salazar, claiming that “a robust professional consensus now acknowledges that sexual orientations and gender identities range widely” and that reality-affirming therapy for trans-identifying kids was ineffective and harmful.

Despite these opinions, Jackson and Obama seem to believe that Jackson has been a relatively neutral jurist.

RELATED: Platner’s replacement in Maine is a family man — just not in the way voters might expect

Obama pressed Jackson about whether she has to closely monitor her exposure to news, media, and other content “so that there isn’t a bias.”

After noting that certain individuals employed at the court screen her invitations for various appearances and events “to make sure that there are no ethical conflicts,” Jackson replied that “there are lots of limits on what judges can do, and I try to be very, very mindful and scrupulous with respect to that because, as you say, our obligation is to be unbiased in our approach.”

“And, so, you have to then navigate all the sources that could make for an appearance of partiality, which you want to avoid,” the Biden nominee continued. “So there are lots of things that I end up not accepting for that reason. News sources, I think, you know, I don’t have a lot of time — unfortunately, you know — but I do, you know, the normal, general media sources are made available, and I think it’s harder when you’re talking about — there’s so much social media now.”

Jackson’s expression of concern about bias and perceptions of bias while in the company of a rank partisan like Michelle Obama struck some critics as insincere or at the very least tone-deaf.

House Republican Conference Chairwoman Lisa McClain (R-Mich.) highlighted the cognitive dissonance, writing, “Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson says SCOTUS must avoid even the appearance of political bias … while appearing on Michelle Obama’s podcast.”

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) wrote, “Ketanji Brown Jackson finds a way to inject political bias into just about everything she does. Whether it’s attending the Grammys, joining Michelle Obama’s podcast, or refusing to define the word woman, she couldn’t care less about remaining impartial.”

“DEI hire justice Ketanji Brown Jackson says she’s careful about which public engagements she accepts because she has to be impartial … As she appears on MICHELLE OBAMA’s podcast,” Libs of TikTok tweeted. “Can’t make this up.”

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

​Joe biden, Ketanji brown jackson, Marsha blackburn, Michelle obama, Us supreme court, Politics 

Virginia Democrats are welcoming criminals back to the ballot box.

Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D) has restored voting rights to 66,085 felons in her first six months in office. That’s 56,000 more than former Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) restored during his entire four-year tenure, according to the official annual reports filed by the secretary of the commonwealth.

‘A shameful relic of our Jim Crow past.’

“I’m proud that — after contending with my predecessor’s efforts to deny Virginians their fundamental rights — we have restored the rights of more than 66,000 Virginians who have served their time,” Spanberger said in a Friday press release. “These Virginians deserve the right to use their vote, make their voices heard, and be recognized as contributing citizens to our Commonwealth and country.”

Spanberger’s office did not respond to requests for comment.

Under Youngkin, applicants were required to submit a formal Restoration of Rights form detailing whether they had completed all terms of incarceration, were on probation or parole, or had been convicted of a violent offense.

Felons were also asked if they had “paid all fines, fees, and restitution” or were currently paying them, according to court filings.

Spanberger’s administration axed those safeguards.

RELATED: Illegal immigrant allegedly attacks Virginia police — after dodging persecution for allegedly choking his wife

JASON REDMOND/AFP/Getty Images

The new team “re-established processes to both review applications and proactively identify — and restore the rights of — Virginians who have lost their right to vote” and is using “a streamlined, online system that removed unnecessary questions added during the Youngkin administration,” according to the press release.

The removed questions included the requirement to report probation status and fine repayment.

The governor also instructed Secretary of the Commonwealth Candi Mundon King to expand “proactive identification” of eligible ex-convicts.

Current eligibility is determined by whether a person has been convicted of a felony and is no longer incarcerated.

“By giving these Virginians back their ability to make an impact at the local, state, and national levels, we are empowering our neighbors to take hold of their second chance,” Spanberger said. “This fall, voters can cast their ballots for Virginia to no longer strip so many of our neighbors of their fundamental rights — a shameful relic of our Jim Crow past.”

Virginia voters will decide in November whether to pass a constitutional amendment automatic restoration of voting rights for released felon inmates.

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

​Virginia, Abigail spanberger, Democratic party, Voter rolls, Politics, Felons 

Pregnant celebrities on red carpets may make later-in-life motherhood look effortless, but BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey is warning that the reality is far more complicated.

Most recently, Anne Hathaway graced the red carpet in a beautiful dress, showing off her bump at 43 years old. While this is Hathaway’s third baby, many women are taking it as proof that women can and should wait until their 40s to become a mother.

“She’s a beautiful pregnant woman. I am so happy for her,” Stuckey says. “And I’m so glad that she is on social media. She’s on the red carpet showing that you can do all of these things. You can have a baby. I also love that she is showing that you don’t have to stop having a baby when you’re 35 just because they call you ‘geriatric’ or whatever it is.”

“You can keep having a baby, and it’s beautiful. It doesn’t ruin your life,” she adds.

Now, the media is running with Hathaway’s pregnancy and making it seem as if it’s as easy to get pregnant in your 40s as it is in your 20s or 30s.

“The Wall Street Journal published an article on July 13 titled, ‘Your 40s used to be middle age. Not anymore,’” Stuckey explains.

“While I am happy about all the things that I listed, and I’m happy about the contribution of another image-bearer of God to the world, and I think motherhood is fantastic, the risks have not changed in association with pregnancy after 40,” she continues.

“Am I saying that you shouldn’t do it if you are a married woman? No. But just because we changed the name because geriatric was offensive doesn’t mean that the risks don’t exist. It is much more difficult to get pregnant after 35 and especially after 40,” she adds.

But the risks don’t just affect the mother.

“The risks to the baby do increase after that,” she says.

And it’s not just the health risks associated with later pregnancies that have Stuckey concerned, but the unrealistic view of time.

“It is pushing this idea that you can party through your 20s, chase your career through your 30s, choose to settle down when you are 38 and you will be just as likely to get married and have children and be a trad wife when you are 45 as if you did it when you were 25,” she says.

“I just don’t want to sell women this unrealistic vision of what their life will absolutely look like if they defer marriage for promiscuity and for their career to be a girlboss forever,” she continues.

“I don’t have a problem obviously with women getting pregnant later in life. I have a problem with us presenting that as if it … is the ideal,” 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.

​Allie beth stuckey, Anne hathaway, God, Motherhood, Trad wife, Wall street journal, Blazetv show 

Sports commentator Stephen A. Smith has completely reversed course over comments he made during COVID about vaccine skepticism.

In Oct. 2021, the Brooklyn Nets said they were not allowing point guard Kyrie Irving to practice or play basketball with the team until he got the coronavirus vaccine.

‘I need to do better. I’m not alone, but I’m responsible for me.’

Smith was among those who heavily criticized Irving for his vaccine reticence.

“Kyrie Irving, I happen to believe, is an intelligent brother whose heart is in the right place,” Smith said at the time. “But now, you’ve regressed to an alarming level of self-righteousness. It not only makes you look hypocritical and untrustworthy, it makes you look what I know you are not, which is flat-out stupid.”

Smith went on to catch the coronavirus despite claiming to have been vaccinated.

In a video published Thursday, Smith cited the appearance before Congress of Dr. Anthony Fauci, the architect of the U.S. coronavirus response, to explain his change of heart.

“There were many people encouraging folks to [get vaccinated] anyway. Kyrie Irving wasn’t one of them,” Smith said. “In my opinion, particularly hindsight-wise, it didn’t make him stubborn or selfish; it made him brave.”

He went on to apologize to Irving.

“Kyrie Irving did nobody wrong. We did him wrong. I did him wrong. And for that, I’m sincerely sorry,” Smith added. “I just thought it was important to say that. … I need to do better. I’m not alone, but I’m responsible for me.”

RELATED: ‘Shame on you!’ Stephen A. Smith tears into people celebrating the killing of Charlie Kirk

He concluded, “I need to do better. And I will.”

Fauci refused to answer questions from members of Congress and instead over and over again pled the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

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, Basketball, Sports, Stephen a smith, Politics, Covid vaccine 

Republicans are worried that the election for one of Texas’ seats in the U.S. Senate is slipping away after astounding results from the most recent polls.

Three of the polls show Democrat candidate James Talarico beating Republican state Attorney General Ken Paxton, and a fourth shows a tie. Another three show Paxton beating the Democrat.

An average of the poll had Talarico above Paxton by 0.7%.

Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah called on conservatives to back Paxton in light of Talarico’s extremist opinions and policies.

“Now is the time for every Republican to support @KenPaxtonTX. No exceptions. We can’t have a senator from Texas who thinks ‘God is nonbinary,'” wrote Lee with a link to the polling. Paxton defeated one of Lee’s colleagues, incumbent Sen. John Cornyn, in the Republican primary runoff after receiving Trump’s endorsement.

Two of the polls showing the Democrat winning were Fox News and New York Times/Siena polls, while the ones showing Paxton winning included Quantus and YouGov.

An average of the poll had Talarico above Paxton by 0.7%.

The Decision Desk election analysis group noted that Talarico was faring far better against Paxton in polling on the road to the election than Beto O’Rourke did when he tried to unseat Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas in 2018. O’Rourke lost that contest.

Paxton most recently went on the attack after a report documented evidence that Talarico might have violated the residency rules when he ran for state representative in 2022.

“James Talarico has proven he has zero regard for Texans and the rule of law. He’s been lying to voters and shamelessly committing election fraud to hold onto power,” he wrote on Tuesday.

RELATED: Yet another bewildering anti-Christian statement from James Talarico has been unearthed

The Talarico campaign claimed that the discrepancy came from processing delays and denied the allegations.

Democrats have a slim chance of winning the U.S. Senate in the midterms, but a victory in Texas would go a long way to help their cause.

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

​Ken paxton, Us senate, James talarico, Polling, Midterm elections, Mike lee, Politics 

Fairfax County officials are facing heavy criticism after the suspect in a violent domestic dispute and an attack on a cop turned out to be an illegal immigrant who was never prosecuted despite allegedly attacking his wife in April.

Officers responding to a domestic disturbance call attempted to arrest Nehemia Fuentes Banegas on Tuesday after he allegedly stabbed himself while threatening his wife. Fuentes Banegas then allegedly fled on foot, hid in a bush, and lunged for a police officer’s service weapon in a frenzied ambush, according to police.

‘3 in 10 residents of the county are immigrants.’

Fuentes Banegas was shot by officers in the ensuing struggle, though the bullet only grazed his shoulder. He is being held without bond at the Fairfax County Adult Detention Center.

Fuentes Banegas was previously cited for reckless driving and driving without a license, according to court records. His race was recorded as white.

Fuentes Banegas is a Honduran national who illegally entered the country in 2022, according to the Department of Homeland Security.

“This criminal illegal alien from Honduras attacked a law enforcement officer and attempted to take the officer’s gun,” DHS spokesperson Lauren Bis said in a statement. “He has now been charged with attempted disarming of a law enforcement officer.”

“ICE is calling on Governor Abigail Spanberger and her fellow sanctuary politicians to commit to not releasing this dangerous criminal from jail,” she continued.

RELATED: DOJ goes to special court to send mother of terrorists back to Afghanistan

Fairfax County J&DR Court Database

In 2021, Fairfax County Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano signed a procedure memorandum barring cooperation with federal immigration authorities.

“To improve community safety, restore trust, and ensure all have equal protection of the law, employees of the Fairfax County Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office shall not assist federal agents with civil immigration enforcement,” the memo reads.

The document also notes that “3 in 10 residents of the county are immigrants.”

Descano Chief of Staff Laura Birnbaum acknowledged that Fuentes Banegas recently faced other criminal charges. A warrant reveals he was accused of “imped[ing] the blood circulation or respiration of another person by knowingly, intentionally, and unlawfully blocking or obstructing the airway … resulting in wounding or bodily injury.”

“Nehemia Fuentes faced charges earlier this year, but his wife, the victim in the case, indicated to prosecutors and other officials at a hearing in May that she did not want to prosecute at the time,” Birnbaum told Blaze News. “This kind of outcome is not uncommon in situations involving domestic violence, where prosecutors have little recourse if a case hinges on a victim’s testimony or cooperation.”

Commonwealth of Virginia/Warrant of Arrest

Birnbaum directed Blaze News to Sheriff Stacey Kincaid when asked if authorities notified ICE after Fuentes Banegas’ initial arrest.

“As required by statute, whenever an undocumented person is booked into the Fairfax County Adult Detention Center, ICE is notified that person has been taken into custody,” a sheriff’s office spokesperson told Blaze News.

The Fairfax County Police Department directed Blaze News to its press release when reached for comment.

“As they were responding to the scene, they encountered both the husband, our suspect, running from the scene and the wife pointing out to our responding patrol officers that, ‘Yes, that is in fact my husband,’” Fairfax County Police Chief Kevin Davis said in a press conference.

“Our suspect takes his right hand, he grabs the firearm that the police officer had in his hand,” Davis said. “The officer, obviously startled, discharged his firearm three times.”

A trial date has yet to be set. ICE has lodged a detainer for Fuentes Banegas, a DHS spokesperson told 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!

​Department of homeland security, Illegal immigrant, Law enforcement officer, Police, Immigration and customs enforcement, Virginia, Politics 

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani (D) is championing his new government-run grocery stores, claiming they’ll bring lower prices and better access to food in underserved neighborhoods.

But Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck — as well as 50 chambers of commerce — see something very different.

“Fifty chamber of commerces voted this week to sue the city of New York. Fifty chamber of commerces. Not 50 CEOs, 50 chambers,” Glenn begins, noting that they’re suing over the $70 million being used to open five government grocery stores, one per borough.

Mamdani is promising these stores will feature a 30% discount.

“I want you to think now as a person that owns a small store or a bodega. Do the arithmetic that every bodega owner in Queens did the second they heard that. A grocery store is one of the thinnest businesses in America,” Glenn says.

“One to 2% net margin. You come with your cart, and you’re paying $100. The man behind the counter clears $1.50. The store clears a $1.50. We went to the store. I think we spent like $350. They’re making less than five bucks off of me,” he continues.

“Why? Because he has to pay the rent and the landlord. He has to pay the property taxes through that rent,” he adds.

Meanwhile, the city-run grocery store doesn’t pay any rent.

“It doesn’t pay property tax. It can’t go out of business because losing money is not failure for a government store. It’s a budget line,” Glenn says.

“One analysis this week projected the city loses about 28 cents on every dollar those stores will ring up. Twenty-eight cents in loss. So the competition is not between two grocers. It’s between a grocer and a grocer’s tax collector,” he adds.

And this isn’t the first time this has been tried in recent history.

“Kansas City ran a small version of this in 2024. The city-supported grocery store lost the state close to, I think, it was like $900,000. The nonprofit that was brought in to run it ended up suing the city over the condition of the store,” Glenn explains.

“So what would work?” he asks.

The answer, he says, is to “stop looking at collectives.”

“Feed the person, not the storefront,” he says, adding, “put money in the hands of the family.”

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.

​New york city, Zohran mamdani, Glenn beck, Grocery stores, Socialism, Blazetv show 

Officials say they are investigating cyberattacks against municipal systems in Minnesota for possible links to Iranian groups.

Minnesota officials previously revealed that state water operations were targeted by cyberattacks on Sunday and Monday.

‘I don’t think there was an Iranian cyberattack. I think Minnesota ought to get its act together.’

On Thursday, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency warned water and wastewater operators that they could be similarly attacked.

CISA said there was a significant increase in the attacks on “programmable logic controllers” involving outside actors changing passwords and locking out the operators. The agency urged operators to remove the PLCs and other operational technology from the internet as soon as possible.

“This activity has resulted in boil water notices and sustained manual operations,” CISA said.

The CISA warning did not mention Iran or Minnesota, but U.S. officials told ABC News that investigators were trying to determine if the hostile regime was responsible for the cyberattacks.

The preliminary suspicion was first reported by the New York Times.

CISA recommended even the most rudimentary of digital security practices, including enabling password protections and changing default passwords.

President Donald Trump, when asked about the possibility of the attacks coming from Iran, blamed Minnesotan officials instead.

“I don’t think so. I think that Minnesota is behind it,” the president said to reporters. “You know who is behind it? Minnesota. Because they’re grossly incompetent. I don’t think there was an Iranian cyberattack. I think Minnesota ought to get its act together.”

He went on to say there would be more revelations about corruption in Minnesota coming from his administration.

RELATED: New study: One Chinese cyberattack could make your taps run dry

“Cyberattacks against critical infrastructure require a coordinated, whole-of-government response,” said John Israel, Minnesota’s chief information security officer, in a statement.

“This incident demonstrates why Minnesota has invested in strong cybersecurity capabilities and partnerships” he added. “Our response worked as intended, enabling agencies at every level of government to rapidly coordinate, contain the incident, and help prevent more serious impacts to critical services.”

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

​Cyberattack, Iran, Minnesota, Donald trump, Politics 

Todd Blanche is aiming to be the next attorney general of the United States. Standing in his way are the Epstein survivors who say he brushed them off, two senators with nothing left to lose, and a questionable connection to one of Epstein’s closest partners in crime.

On the second day of Blanche’s confirmation hearing earlier this month, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said a meeting with survivors needed to happen before he would vote to confirm Blanche. Survivors weren’t having a stand-in — they wanted Blanche and got him that same afternoon, pressing him on compensation, prosecutions, and unaddressed leads.

Blanche interviewed Maxwell and granted her immunity for her statements.

Blanche reportedly said only the FBI could open new investigations and that he couldn’t make commitments that day.

Dani Bensky, who has been identified as one of Epstein’s victims, described a frustrating meeting with Blanche, telling CNN, “He danced around his wording, repeatedly interrupted us, and could not commit to anything that would demonstrate good faith or begin to restore trust.”

That’s the survivors’ side of Blanche’s trouble.

The other side is a $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization” fund tied to Trump’s May settlement with the IRS, which Blanche has since declared dead — though concerns, raised chiefly by Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Tillis, remain regarding the possibility of a revival of the fund.

RELATED: Trump BLASTS Cornyn and Tillis for holding AG nomination HOSTAGE

Oliver Contreras/AFP/Getty Images

These threads have spelled trouble for Blanche — as has his connection to Jeffrey Epstein’s convicted partner in crime, Ghislaine Maxwell. On Wednesday, the Senate unanimously passed a resolution declaring that Maxwell, the convicted sex trafficker who aided Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse of underage girls, should never receive a presidential pardon — though it carries no legal force.

Last year, as deputy attorney general, Blanche interviewed Maxwell and granted her immunity for her statements.

In her floor remarks, Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), who introduced the resolution earlier this year, cited a report that Blanche had floated the idea that Maxwell’s attorney “might expect something in return for her candor.”

Rosen said she was pushing for a vote now specifically because Senate Republicans are inching toward confirming Blanche as permanent attorney general.

RELATED: DAMNING report at prestigious academy finds Jeffrey Epstein — and 46 other alleged abusers — molested students

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc/Getty Images

Trump, for his part, has floated another option entirely: pulling the nomination and resubmitting it after Cornyn’s and Tillis’ terms end in January, when neither will still be in the chamber to block it.

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

​Attorney general, Ghislaine maxwell, Jacky rosen, John cornyn, Thom tillis, Todd blanche, Politics, Fbi, Jeffrey epstein 

A man set out to scale Montana’s tallest mountain, but he suffered a gruesome injury along the way. Yet still, the man miraculously hiked 10 miles down the mountain.

KTLA-TV reported that 32-year-old David Cifaldi and two hiking companions were crossing Montana’s ominous Froze-to-Death Plateau and approaching the summit of Granite Peak on the morning of July 20.

‘A couple of inches the other way, and this would be a different story.’

The Mountain Guides, a hiking website, said that Granite Peak is Montana’s highest summit with an elevation of 12,803 feet.

“This formidable mountain is located in the heart of the remote and scenic Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness, just north of Yellowstone National Park,” according to the Mountain Guides, which noted, “Granite Peak is considered by many to be the most difficult high-point summit after Denali.”

Cifaldi suffered a grisly injury from a freak hiking accident during his arduous trek: He was impaled by his own steel-tipped trekking pole.

The Associated Press reported that a 44-inch steel-tipped pole “passed through the flesh beneath Cifaldi’s left arm, missing any vital organs, and protruded from his back.”

Cifaldi proclaimed that he needed to get off the mountain.

“I was like, ‘We’ve got to get off this mountain.’ And they’re both like, ‘I don’t know about that,'” Cifaldi told the AP.

Cifaldi joked, “‘Tis but a flesh wound.”

Cifaldi, a wound care nurse in Montana, and his friends considered getting a helicopter to rescue him on the mountain. However, they decided that a helicopter rescue would be very expensive.

“Search and rescue coming to help you is free. The flight’s not,” Cifaldi explained.

“That was a factor in me deciding to self-rescue,” Cifaldi continued. “But the fact that I had two experienced great friends with me and we had the ability to contact search and rescue if something went wrong made that a lot more of an easy decision.”

The quick-thinking Cifaldi stated, “I think my nurse brain clicked on. As soon as I was able to self-assess and establish that this was not life-threatening right now, I was pretty convinced I was going to get off that mountain under my own power.”

(WARNING: Graphic video)

RELATED: Hero fishermen save 38 dogs on the verge of drowning in Mississippi lake

The group utilized a satellite-based communication device to inform local authorities that they planned to rescue Cifaldi themselves.

Stillwater County Search and Rescue team commander Ty Williams told the Associated Press that the first emergency call about Cifaldi was received at around 9:44 a.m. on July 20.

“There was no danger to anybody else. He didn’t want our help, and so we’re not going to essentially violate his rights or go against his wishes by forcing our help on him,” Williams stated.

However, the impaled hiker would have to hike approximately 10 miles and descend about 5,000 feet to travel to a trailhead where Cifaldi’s friend had parked a vehicle, according to the Associated Press.

A GoFundMe campaign launched to help Cifaldi financially said, “David navigated the plateau’s snowfields and boulder fields, made his way down past Mystic Lake, and reached the trailhead entirely under his own power — never once complaining, staying in remarkably high spirits. Near Mystic Lake, he even asked one of us to hike ahead and warn other hikers, so no children would have to see the wound.”

It took the group more than six hours to get to the friend’s vehicle, and then they transported Cifaldi to a local clinic.

Doctors at the clinic informed Cifaldi that he would need more advanced medical treatment when he returned to his hometown of Billings, Montana. The AP reported that Cifaldi’s friends drove him for treatment at the St. Vincent Regional Hospital — where Cifaldi works as a nurse.

Doctors were able to remove the pole from Cifaldi.

The friend with the vehicle, Jesse Ross, credited Cifaldi’s confidence for conquering the challenge of hiking down the mountain with such a severe injury.

“The only reason it was possible at all was his confidence,” Ross told the AP. “Who are we to say anything? He’s the medical person. Our job is just to support at that point.”

Cifaldi declared, “I think 99 times out of a hundred I would make the same decision.”

The GoFundMe campaign, which raised nearly $10,000, said Cifaldi may require surgery, missed time from work, and now faces “significant medical bills for an injury that happened while doing something he loves.”

Cifaldi told KSL-TV, “I feel very lucky. A couple of inches the other way, and this would be a different story.”

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

​Montana, News, Survivor story, Politics