Category: blaze media

Immigration and Customs Enforcement just snagged another batch of career criminals.

The Department of Homeland Security announced another round of arrests, including child molesters, rapists, and drug dealers, on Tuesday. The illegal aliens were apprehended in targeted arrests across the country.

‘ICE is detaining and removing illegal aliens every single day.’

The DHS’ Worst of the Worst program highlights particularly egregious criminal illegal aliens apprehended by federal authorities.

“Just yesterday, ICE arrested child molesters, rapists, domestic assailants, and other worst of the worst criminal illegal aliens,” Assistant Secretary Lauren Bis told Blaze News Wednesday. “While sanctuary politicians continue to release dangerous criminals onto their streets, our brave law enforcement will continue to risk their lives to arrest these heinous criminals and make America safe again.”

Salvadoran alien Noe Rios-Hernandez was previously convicted of two counts of child molestation, three counts of illegal re-entry, and assault. She was apprehended by federal authorities in Johnson County, Iowa.

Her compatriot Maria Guadalupe Hernandez-Rodriguez was caught in Montgomery County, Maryland, and previously served time for possession of narcotics with intent to distribute.

Honduran alien and convicted rapist Erlin Molina-Ramos was also apprehended in Goshen, New York.

RELATED: Man accused of horrific sex crime tries — and FAILS — to squeak by CBP

ICE CHARLY TRIBALLEAU/AFP/Getty Images

In Texas, ICE arrested Jose De La Luz Garcia-Pizarro, a Mexican national convicted of family violence and felony trespassing.

Cuban illegal migrant Abel Alejandro Perez-Beltran was detained in Lee County, Florida, and had a previous conviction for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

“Under President Trump’s leadership, ICE is detaining and removing illegal aliens every single day,” Bis 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!

​Immigration and customs enforcement, Department of homeland security, Politics 

The Democratic National Committee is circling the drain.

Unlike the Republican National Committee, which had no debt and $128.53 million in cash on hand at the end of last month, the DNC under the leadership of Chairman Ken Martin had only $16.3 million on hand and was over $18.5 million in debt.

‘The result of fraudulent activity by an external third party.’

According to the New York Times, the Democratic Party is so desperate, it has begun asking vendors to put off sending invoices until after the midterm elections.

In its desperation, the DNC had to post something near and dear as collateral in order to secure a $15 million loan from Amalgamated Bank in October — a loan that was reportedly timed to enable seven-figure financial transfers to then-gubernatorial candidates in Virginia and New Jersey.

NOTUS, citing D.C. deed records, highlighted that the DNC actually put up its physical headquarters at 430 South Capitol Street in Southeast D.C. as a security — but did not explicitly note the building’s use as assurance in the relevant FEC filings.

This evidently prickled those elements within the DNC that have turned on the DNC chairman, who was described last year by party officials as “weak and whiny.”

“Ken gaslighting us about the DNC’s finances and not being transparent about the financial situation makes us doubt if he can oversee the DNC during the most important primary of our lifetime,” one DNC member said, according to NOTUS.

A DNC official said in a statement obtained by NOTUS, “This is not new. The loan documents were publicly released in November, and the DNC’s building was also used as collateral in our prior lines of credit in 2019, 2018, 2014, and many other years.”

RELATED: ‘He’s been lying to voters’: Paxton BEATS DOWN Talarico over alleged election fraud

Spencer Platt/Getty Images

Martin tried to paint lipstick on this donkey in a July 20 blog post, stating, “So why does the DNC have less cash on hand than some expect? Because we made a conscious decision to invest money in the work required to win in 2025, 2026, and beyond. We are converting the cash we raise into electoral assets: more people, earlier organizing, better technology, and stronger state parties.”

“A larger bank account does not knock on a door, register a voter, recruit a candidate, or protect the vote,” Martin wrote. “We have chosen to build. We are replacing a boom-and-bust campaign model with permanent political infrastructure. We are not choosing between winning now and building for the future. Our investments are designed to do both.”

Despite his practiced ability to cast failure in a positive light, Martin, who took over the DNC in February 2025 and whose term is supposed to end in 2029, is fast running out of friends and beginning to crack under the pressure.

Multiple sources described to the New York Times an incident earlier this month where Martin, “in a pique of frustration,” allegedly threw his phone at the desk of a junior aide while reprimanding the individual. Martin and the DNC declined the Times’ invitation to comment on the matter.

Around the DNC headquarters, which has been staked as collateral, Martin has allegedly been making dark jokes about his ouster and expressing concerns about leaks and a potential mutiny.

“Ken needs help — H-E-L-P,” former acting DNC chairwoman Donna Brazile told the Times. “And if he’s reluctant to say it, I’m here to help him ask. It’s hard. It’s very difficult.”

Some Democrats are publicly calling for Martin to throw in the towel.

California Rep. Sam Liccardo (D), for instance, tweeted on Sunday, “Ken Martin must resign. As Democrats, we have become too captured by failing strategies. We must fail forward, and pivot. The urgency of this moment will not reward — and our children will not forgive — torpidity.”

The DNC’s humiliation was compounded further this week by the revelation that besides the $75,000 or more the organization is paying in interest on the $15 million October loan, it was scammed out of nearly $29,000 last year, reportedly by an email scammer pretending to be Martin.

A senior FEC campaign finance and reviewing analyst issued a request to the DNC on July 8, 2025, for information pertaining to a “misdisbursement” totaling $28,860.92 referenced in a monthly report that “appears to be related to an apparent unauthorized disbursement of Committee funds.”

The DNC said in response that the “identified transaction was the result of fraudulent activity by an external third party.”

A committee staffer received a fraudulent email from an unknown individual claiming to be Martin in February 2025 — just days after Martin became chairman — and made a hefty payment to the fraudster, NOTUS reported.

The DNC promptly reported the transaction to its bank, Wells Fargo, but was reportedly able to recover only $7,000 of the cash. The staffer is no longer with the DNC, according to NOTUS.

“This was a one-off mistake that was promptly caught and addressed, and no similar issues have occurred since,” DNC spokeswoman Mia Ehrenberg said.

In addition to throwing away money it can’t afford to lose, the DNC is grappling with the party’s historic unpopularity.

According to an Economist/YouGov poll conducted last month, 54% of Americans hold an unfavorable opinion of the Democratic Party. Among those over 29, the numbers are even worse for the party.

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

​Democratic national committee, Ken martin, Republican national committee, Donna brazile, Federal election commission, Politics 

Ask almost anyone why America seems angrier than it did a generation ago, and you’ll hear the usual suspects: social media, partisan politics, cable news. But what if another culprit has been hiding in plain sight all along — inside the songs we play every day?

A study recently published in Scientific Reports suggests our playlists may tell us more about the country’s moral trajectory than we realize. Researchers analyzed nearly 400,000 songs spanning six decades, tracking how often lyrics invoked virtues such as care, loyalty, and compassion versus themes of cheating, revenge, vice, and harm.

Nobody racks up a billion Spotify streams with a breakup anthem called ‘I Respect Your Boundaries and Wish You Well.’

The results were difficult to ignore.

Monetize the misery

Lyrical themes centered on betrayal, cruelty, and moral transgression have surged, while old-fashioned virtues like loyalty, empathy, and basic decency have steadily faded. Grandma’s favorite crooner asked for your hand in marriage. Today’s streaming superstar wants to key your car, burn down your house, and monetize the misery.

The statistics read like a rap sheet for the Billboard charts. References to cheating and betrayal rose by more than 70%. Themes of degradation climbed by over 60%. Meanwhile, expressions of genuine care steadily declined. The charts increasingly reward revenge, resentment, and contempt while rewarding compassion far less than they once did. We have moved a long way from “We Can Work It Out” to “I hope you choke on your lies.”

Naturally, the researchers include the obligatory academic disclaimer: Correlation does not equal causation. Fair enough.

The real question isn’t whether every listener imitates every lyric. It’s whether hundreds of millions of people, absorbing the same emotional scripts year after year, gradually reshape the emotional climate of a culture.

RELATED: Pop star Olivia Rodrigo hosts all-female music fest to fund Planned Parenthood; ‘I am so ecstatic’

Michael Le Brecht II/Disney/Getty Images

Despair in D

Music has never been mere background noise. It reinforces emotional habits. Songs teach us which reactions deserve applause, which resentments should be nurtured, and which kinds of people become heroes or villains. They don’t dictate behavior, but they help define what feels normal.

For anyone who still insists lyrics are just harmless poetry, consider the grunge explosion of the early 1990s. That era produced extraordinary music, but it also made alienation, despair, and emotional detachment strangely glamorous. Grunge didn’t invent teenage angst, but it undeniably gave it a soundtrack and, for many young listeners, an identity.

If a generation could absorb that emotional atmosphere through music, it isn’t unreasonable to wonder what six uninterrupted decades of increasingly cynical and vengeful lyrics might accomplish.

Betrayal with a beat

Of course, the counter-argument deserves serious consideration. Perhaps musicians are simply cultural weather vanes rather than cultural architects. When public trust collapses, institutions weaken, and family life frays, songwriters naturally gravitate toward darker material. Popular music may simply be documenting a society already in decline. The songs are less the explosion than the soundtrack playing while the building burns.

Even if that’s true, it still leaves us with an uncomfortable feedback loop. Society grows harsher. Music reflects that harshness. The music then normalizes it for the next generation, making cruelty ordinary and contempt emotionally familiar.

We also can’t ignore the incentives of the modern attention economy. One doesn’t have to become a card-carrying Marxist to recognize that outrage is profitable. Streaming platforms, much like social media, reward intensity over restraint. Nobody racks up a billion Spotify streams with a breakup anthem called “I Respect Your Boundaries and Wish You Well.” Audiences crave betrayal, public humiliation, vengeance, and emotional spectacle because those emotions command attention.

Did pop music single-handedly make America meaner? Probably not.

But for more than half a century, our most popular songs have steadily sung less about forgiveness, loyalty, sacrifice, and reconciliation and more about revenge, narcissism, betrayal, and score-settling.

Culture is an ongoing conversation. If, decade after decade, the soundtrack of everyday life increasingly celebrates contempt over compassion, we shouldn’t be surprised when public life begins to sound the same way.

​America, Attention economy, Lyrics, Music, Pop music, Public life, Science, Anger, Civility, Culture 

Christopher Nolan will likely not want to meet his hero.

The blockbuster filmmaker cited one woman’s specific translation months ago as a source of inspiration for his adaptation of “The Odyssey,” but those remarks have completely backfired now that the author has seen Nolan’s film.

‘The writing is abysmal. None of the characters has convincing motivation for their actions or words.’

‘Nothing convincing’

Nolan told Empire magazine in November how much he loved Emily Wilson’s 2017 translation of the historic text.

“I think it’s the Emily Wilson translation that begins, ‘Tell me about a complicated man,'” Nolan recalled. “The genius of the character, the cleverness, the inventiveness of him, that was a huge part of what interested me. He’s not just a soldier. He’s an amazing strategist, a very wily person.”

Despite the flattering citation, Nolan’s adoration was not reciprocated by Wilson at all, who burned his adaptation at the stake in a 4,000-word review.

In a lengthy reaction titled “An Uncomplicated Man,” Wilson eloquently pummeled the film for being noisy, emotionless, and poorly written.

Wilson said the film lacked many of the elements that make a poem great, while having “nothing convincing” to say about the history, war, or relationships of the time.

“It lacks psychological, emotional, political, and ethical depth,” Wilson detailed. “Its narrative structure is gimmicky. The writing is abysmal. None of the characters has convincing motivation for their actions or words. There are no sex scenes, and all the food looks horrible.”

Wilson then directly addressed Nolan’s reference to her translation, before bluntly stating, “I would be ashamed to have written any part of this script.”

RELATED: Christopher Nolan’s ‘Odyssey’ is peak Hollywood elitist: ‘He’s so snooty’

Jackie Molloy for the Washington Post/Getty Images

Noise complaint

Despite audiences complaining about the casting of the film — which included a woman (Elliot Page) playing a pivotal male role — viewers still came out in droves to help Nolan continue his pursuit of keeping movie theaters alive and well.

“The Odyssey” released to a whopping $123 million domestic opening, earning over $650 million worldwide to date. This, off of a $250 million budget.

However, all the praise in the world could not save Nolan from the scathing review offered by his inspiration, who said she could not escape the noise of the film “without a tub of wax for my ears.”

“I was exposed to the full din of thumping sticks, staffs, swords and clashing armour, thunderbolts, crashing waves, grunts, screams, toppling palaces, and burning temples,” Wilson wrote, continuing a theme of describing the film as an audible assault.

She continued, comparing the film to “an elaborate Fourth of July fireworks display — and with about the same level of narrative and emotional depth.”

RELATED: America needs heroes who do not apologize for being heroes

Aalok Soni/Getty Images for Universal Pictures

Bang for your buck

Wilson did find room at the end of her review to praise the film’s release for making the source material popular again and for “bringing audiences back to cinemas.”

She wrote that it was still an event to celebrate which has resulted in translations of the story, including her own, “flying off the shelves.” Still, this was after she labeled the movie an underdeveloped piece of art that failed to deliver.

“The film’s vision is too confused, its characters too underdeveloped, to deliver what it half-promises in terms of big ideas — although it is very good at conveying big bangs and big giants.”

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

​Christopher nolan, The odyssey, Emily wilson, Entertainment 

HBO’s exclusive content app is diving headfirst into what viewers are calling a brain-frying form of entertainment.

HBO Max, the network’s streaming app, announced on Tuesday that it will roll out a new feature that utilizes its iconic content. Unfortunately for the network, reactions to the news are not just overwhelmingly negative, they’ve been outright atrocious.

‘Tik-Tok and Instagram really fried peoples brains.’

Short cuts

Jumping into the world of TikTok, YouTube, and Instagram, HBO Max has decided to implement a short-video feed of its exclusive content, which includes massively popular titles like “The Sopranos,” “Entourage,” and “Sex and the City.”

Subscribers will now be able to doomscroll vertical videos on the app, HBO said in a press release, “customized to individual tastes and preferences based on watch history.”

In an X post about the announcement — which was far more popular than HBO’s own post — readers quickly piled on the network, calling the change an attempt to pander to those with a short attention span.

“The destruction of humanity’s attention span is a bad thing, actually,” John Monaco replied.

“Shows you how much attention span has declined over the years … I’m really worried about future generations,” another man commented.

RELATED: Hollywood’s Bleeding

Thomas Fuller/SOPA Images/LightRocket/Getty Images

Scroll with it

Reactions were harsh, with multiple users calling the feature an attempt to appeal to “retards” and even comparing the feature to cocaine addiction.

“I literally know very few people who have quit short form scrolling style video, reels etc,” a California man wrote. “This is a huge problem. And the younger people really don’t know what life was like before it, so that’s also a problem. Its worse that cocaine.”

“Tik-Tok and Instagram really fried peoples brains,” a movie-related podcast account added.

However, HBO disagrees.

Deepna Devkar, HBO’s senior vice president for machine learning, revealed that not only is the company excited about the new feature, its clips are being created using artificial intelligence.

“We’re thrilled to launch this application of AI to accelerate the creation of these clips and look forward to quickly expanding to make even more of our amazing content offering discoverable through this new feature,” Devkar said in the announcement.

RELATED: OnlyFans models are offended by Sydney Sweeney mocking their degeneracy on her TV show

Malcolm Ali/WireImage

Search me

While some suggested HBO simply “make good shows again,” other readers believe the move would be a net negative by getting viewers used to short-form content, theoretically discouraging them from watching the TV series that are available on the app.

HBO Max isn’t the only nonsocial platform knee-deep in the scrolling game though. Netflix similarly expanded its own vertical clips feed earlier this year to include shorts from its library as a way to push new and old content.

At the same time, HBO Max announced a second new feature, a “conversational search experience,” which helps users find content based on wider search terms, as opposed to having to enter the title of a show or movie.

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

​Hbo, Streaming, Netflix, Entertainment 

Earlier this week, a 31-year-old man was arrested in Paris after stabbing three women, one of whom was pregnant, with kitchen knives. Even though video footage of his detainment captured him saying, “It is Allah who commanded me,” Interior Minister Laurent Nunez claimed the motive of the attack was unknown.

“You rolled your eyes, didn’t you? … I know you did,” says Glenn Beck.

But France isn’t the only European country that has seen recent terror attacks.

Just a few days before the Paris knife attack, 21-year-old Abdul Ballout drove a van into a Berlin Pride event, killing one woman and injuring dozens before attacking with a machete; police shot him dead the next day after he charged at officers with a sharp object.

“He was already convicted of planning at least one terror attack, but then he was let out conditionally. … He was assigned to complete … anti-terrorism or anti-radical classes,” says Glenn’s head writer and researcher, Jason Buttrill.

Glenn argues these attacks aren’t isolated but are actually symptoms of something much deeper and even more sinister: “the red-green alliance” of socialist Marxists and Islamist movements.

“I believe the red-green alliance is a death cult,” he says, warning that if the Democratic Party doesn’t recognize it is “in bed with” a coalition that “[wants] total destruction of everything” America stands on, the consequences the nation will suffer are dire.

Glenn then tells the story of Michel Foucault, the influential gay French philosopher who enthusiastically supported the 1979 Iranian Revolution, only for the new regime to almost immediately start executing homosexuals.

Foucault, he argues, was wrong to refuse to take back or even caveat his original praise. In his 1979 essay on the Iranian Revolution, he never named the executions, never admitted he had been wrong about the regime he praised, and never took his support back.

“He should have written, ‘I went to Tehran, and I mistook intensity for justice. I saw men willing to die, and I assumed that anyone willing to die for a thing must be right about that thing. … The government I praised is now hanging men for what I am. I was wrong. This is not going to end well,”’ says Glenn.

But that admission, he explains, never came for the same reason today’s progressive LGBTQ activists refuse to acknowledge they’re supporting groups who would execute people like them the moment they gained power: “An honest mind treats being wrong as information. A weak one treats it as injury.”

“So how is [Foucault] actually wrong? Three ways, and they’re still on the market today,” says Glenn.

Number one: He mistook passion for morality.

“He judged a movement by how it felt to the people inside instead of by what it would do to the people underneath it,” says Glenn. “Passion is not a moral argument. Everyone who has ever built a gallows was passionate.”

Number two: He rejected Western liberal institutions — courts, rights, rule of law — as mere “masks that power wore.” But when a revolutionary movement actually showed up to tear those institutions down, Foucault had already discarded the only “ruler” he might have used to judge what replaced them.

“If everything is a mask, then you can’t tell the difference between a constitution and a firing squad,” says Glenn.

Number three: He ignored warnings. When an Iranian woman wrote to him at the time of the Revolution and told him he was romanticizing men who would soon put men like him in prison, he doubled down on his support.

“He was warned. This is not about philosophy; this is about character. It’s about intentional, self-imposed ignorance or blindness,” says Glenn, highlighting Foucault’s stubborn refusal to correct the record.

The same three mistakes, he warns, are being made by today’s socialist Marxists who have formed an alliance with Islamists — but we need to be very calculated in how we challenge them, or we risk further entrenching their support.

To hear Glenn’s advice regarding how to effectively engage and challenge this misled group, watch the video above.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Glenn beck, Europe, Paris, Berlin, France, Germany, Islam, Marxism, Socialism, Blazetv show 

The Federal Communications Commission is set to ban foreign products in two specific categories that affect national security.

On Monday, the FCC released its determination that also revealed a glimpse into what the United States military has up its sleeves in terms of autonomous warfare.

‘The US military is already pursuing advanced robotics for autonomous breaching.’

The United States has decided to ban “Foreign-Produced Advanced Robotic Devices,” citing that they are often equipped with sensors, light detectors, and other technology that “collect and maintain sensitive data on their surroundings.”

The national security brief noted that such data must be protected and maintained in the United States, and with that, foreign-made robots cannot be trusted.

At the same time, the summary determination stated that the government believes “advanced robotic devices such as Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGVs) and quadrupeds will be essential to the modern battlefield.”

The document continued, describing just what type of missions robots will be involved in through the armed forces.

“The U.S. military is already pursuing advanced robotics for autonomous breaching, resupply missions, force protection, and offensive strike.”

It was also noted that unmanned ground vehicles being used in “current conflicts” have been able to “inflict casualties while offsetting the effects of exquisite conventional capabilities.”

RELATED: The FCC just banned foreign-made routers — here’s which ones might be stealing your data

CFOTO/Future Publishing/Getty Images

The FCC summarized its ban with supplemental claims that “advanced robotic systems create extensive vulnerabilities and vectors for attacks that can manipulate the data and physical operation of the advanced robotic system.”

It is for that reason, they said, that relying on foreign-produced advanced robotics presents “unacceptable supply chain and cybersecurity vulnerabilities.”

Second on the FCC’s list was a ban on “Foreign-Produced Power Inverters.”

The government agency explained that power inverters convert direct current electricity into alternating current electricity and facilitate the connection of certain DC energy sources — like solar panel — into the predominantly AC-based U.S. energy grid.

Therefore, it was the FCC’s determination that foreign-made products of this type could threaten “sectors critical to national security,” “cybersecurity,” and overall, the safety of Americans.

RELATED: ‘Anti-clanker’: Why millions of people are cheering this android’s humiliation

Zeng Hui/Xinhua/Getty Images

The FCC explained that introducing foreign-made power inverters could render the equivalent of 46 nuclear power plants useless if they were to be used in an attack. Approximately 46 gigawatts of electric power on the U.S. grid relies on inverters and will reportedly account for a larger part of new power generation moving forward.

These statements were among many related to the introduction of massive power-sucking sources like data centers, which the FCC said are putting further strain on an already weak grid. It was the U.S. government’s determination that the grid needed to be protected from foreign intervention before it is too late.

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

​Federal communications commission, Power grid, Power inverters, Robots, Tech 

The Democrat mayor of St. Paul who once confessed on the floor of the Minnesota House that she is “an illegal in this country” now finds herself at the center of an entirely new controversy.

In June 2025, then-state Rep. Kaohly Her (DFL) told her colleagues that her father got her family into America from Laos by falsifying immigration paperwork. A few months later, Her — now a U.S. citizen and a vociferous critic of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement — was elected mayor of St. Paul.

‘The mayor has deep respect for city employees.’

Like her father, Her also apparently has a strained relationship with the law — or at least with law enforcement.

The City of Saint Paul has hired Resolute Law, an outside law firm, to investigate Mayor Her over allegations of sexual harassment against St. Paul Police Chief Axel Henry and other city employees, reported the Minnesota Star Tribune.

Chris Madel, the attorney who is representing Chief Henry, noted in an April 1 letter to City Attorney Irene Kao that the police chief had decided to designate himself as a formal complainant against the Democrat mayor “for illegal employment practices against City employees, including himself.”

The letter accuses Her of using “one or more mobile phones to communicate inappropriate, and, indeed, unlawful text messages” to city employees, including an alleged message — accompanying an image of a police officer’s face superimposed on a baby’s body — about giving someone “a good weinering.”

Her’s office did not immediately respond to Blaze News’ request for comment.

RELATED: Tim Walz gets TORCHED over dolls with ‘swappable genitals’ meant for kids as young as 4: Report

Victor J. Blue/Bloomberg/Getty Images

Madel demanded that the city take “all steps necessary to perform a full filesystem extraction” of each of Her’s mobile phones, which would provide investigators with access to her text messages, photos, videos, and emails.

Madel said that Henry had made the decision “after becoming aware that the Mayor’s conduct has extended beyond isolated incidents and has included sexual harassment of subordinate City employees, including members of the Saint Paul Police Department. Recognizing both the seriousness of that misconduct and the vulnerability of those directly affected, he is concerned that, absent a formal complaint, the behavior will continue unchecked and may expose others to retaliation for speaking out.”

Henry’s attorney told Alpha News that the chief is attempting to hold the leftist mayor accountable “because it’s the right thing to do. And he just helped crack a triple homicide in under four hours — that’s the work he’s focused on right now: keeping citizens safe.”

A spokeswoman for the foreign-born mayor’s office told KSTP-TV, “To protect confidentiality and the integrity of the process, the City will not comment on an active investigation. The mayor has deep respect for city employees and regrets any unintended impact her actions may have had.”

While Her is now supposedly remorseful, this may not be her first rodeo.

Shirly Yang, who apparently served with Her for years on the board of the National Kidney Foundation in the Gopher State, recently sought a restraining order against Her for alleged intimidation and harassment. According to Yang, whose petition was ultimately denied by a Ramsey County court referee in January, the mayor allegedly inundated her with inappropriate messages, frequently of a sexually explicit and intrusive nature.

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

​St paul, Minnesota, Democrat, Kaohly her, Politics 

Over the past 15 years, America has abandoned just about every social rule, every kind of etiquette, and every normative behavior that used to make public interaction bearable. I’ve decided it’s time to open Uncle Josh’s Finishing School. Unlike the establishments of yore that taught society girls the finer and fussier points of manners, my school will concentrate on remedial education.

Today, we will be reviewing the rules of the road. Matriculants, open your desks and take out your copy of the Uniform Vehicle Code and your state Department of Motor Vehicles’ manual for new drivers. We will be referring to these texts.

I call this a ‘box-in,’ and drivers do it every time I’m on I-89. It’s not just annoying and inconsiderate to camp in the passing lane, it’s illegal in half the country.

Learn to ‘Code’

The Uniform Vehicle Code is a model law. It’s not an actual state or federal law. It’s a universal template on which every state bases its rules of the road.

Your state has a driver’s handbook through its Department of Motor Vehicles. These are nearly identical from state to state. The only exceptions will be local idiosyncrasies, such as New York City’s ban on turning right on red.

For this article, we’ll use the Vermont manual. Your state’s manual will have nearly identical laws and rules.

This lesson is for all of you. Whether you’re my Boomer grandmother, my Gen X peer, a Millennial, or Gen Z, many of you have forgotten the basic rules of the road.

Road rules are not just about being nice. They’re the difference between life and death. While it’s true that millions of foreigners and illegal aliens have flooded our roads with dangerous, unskilled driving, we Americans are barely better.

Automotive anarchy

Here’s how it looks from a big picture perspective. Over the past 10 years, but much more rapidly since “COVID,” I’ve noticed that American drivers are acting as though all the road rules they knew their whole life just disappeared.

All of a sudden, no one knows who has the right-of-way at a four-way stop with a sign. All of a sudden, no one understands that a red light means “stop” — they sail through a solid red light not looking in either direction. All of a sudden, no one remembers that the left lane on an interstate is not a travel lane but a lane for passing.

I don’t think Americans have actually forgotten these things. Instead, I suspect our culture’s lurch toward selfish narcissism, accelerated by the psychosis of our response to “COVID,” has led to people just not caring about anyone but themselves.

Trouble is, that selfish attitude won’t protect the selfish driver. It’s not just the other guy in the other car who could get hurt — the selfish driver could die too.

Let’s review the most neglected rules of the road.

RELATED: Crash course: How cars work

Matt Himes

Right-of-way at 4-way stops

Imagine an intersection with cars at all four corners. They’re all stopped at a stop sign. Who goes first? Let me tell you what this is like in Vermont. This is a blue/progressive state, and that mindset infects everything, including how people walk in stores or drive on streets. It’s a baffling mixture of people trying to be “nice” to other drivers in a way that seems more about showing off “being nice” than it is about making driving safer and more predictable.

At that four-way stop in Vermont, you will see all four cars inching/stopping/inching for up to 10 seconds. Then, someone at one of the four forks will start waving another driver through. That’s the “being nice” part. But it’s a trap. No one else at the intersection remembers that right-of-way passes to the right, so you can’t predict if you’ll get T-boned.

This isn’t “nice.” It’s dangerous. The reason for having road laws is to give universal predictability. Ignoring road laws means that no driver can predict what another driver will do. This is begging for a wreck.

Here’s how you know who goes first. This is taken from the Vermont DMV manual. It is the same right-of-way in every state in America:

The first driver to arrive at the four-way stop has the right-of-way. If there is confusion, then:The driver on the right has the right-of-way when there are two drivers at the intersection.If there are more than two drivers, you will have to make eye contact with someone and “negotiate” who is the first to go.After the first person goes, the right-of-way goes clockwise, to the right.

Right-of-way at T-intersections

The driver on the “through road,” the road that does not terminate at a stop, has the right-of-way.That means if you’re on a road that ends at a T, the traffic on the other road, the “through” road, has the right-of-way. You must stop, even if there is no stop sign.

Right-of-way at unmarked intersections

When two roads merge, either with a T, or by curving together and becoming one road, the “through” traffic on the main road has the right-of-way. If you are on the access road approaching the main road, you do not have the right-of-way. You must yield to traffic on the through road.

Left-lane ‘camping’ on the interstate

This is a particular annoyance to me as a Vermont driver. We have only one major interstate, Eisenhower Interstate, I-89. This means I-89 gets, for us, “a lot” of traffic. It’s the only efficient way to get through much of the state. I have to drive 40 miles to get to a home improvement store, for example, and I must take I-89 if I don’t want to have to go 30 miles an hour through villages if I take Route 2.

But I-89 only has two lanes in each direction. That means that if driver Gloria is “camping” in the left/passing lane, driver Gloria has arrogated the entire interstate to herself. She forces every driver behind her to be unable to pass her as she does five miles below the speed limit, matching her speed to the truck in the right-hand travel lane.

I call this a “box-in,” and drivers do it every time I’m on I-89. It’s not just annoying and inconsiderate to camp in the passing lane, it’s illegal in half the country.

That’s right. It is illegal to use the left lane as a travel lane in at least half of U.S. states. Do you know the law in your state?

Even if it’s legal in your state to use the left lane as a travel lane, it’s a poor choice. It’s rude and inconsiderate to other drivers. Put yourself in their shoes. Remember how it’s frustrating to you to be prevented from passing because driver Gloria feels like camping in front of you and a line of cars. Don’t do that to other drivers.

Inconsiderate behavior like this is a major cause of the breakdown in civility, and it also provokes dangerous road-rage incidents.

A plea to the police

The good will of people willing to be responsible for themselves only goes so far. We need active law enforcement too.

To my eye as a driver, local and state police are doing a poor job. Despite the fact that cellphone use (not just calls, but texting and reading on the phone) has skyrocketed, most police I notice spend most or all of their traffic enforcement time doing the old-school “pull over and hide on the highway and nab speeders.”

I don’t see any evidence that police are taking the other, growing dangers more seriously. Have you seen cops enforcing traffic infractions like left-lane camping, stealing right-of-way at intersections, or pulling over Jayden who’s piloting a Nissan Armada while looking down at his iPhone?

Sure, it’s harder to detect and enforce against distracted driving than it is to nab someone on the radar. But there has to be a way to do it better.

​Rules of the road, Driver’s ed, Driving, America, Etiquette, Safety, Intervention 

On Wednesday morning, a much anticipated hearing featuring Dr. Anthony Fauci began as he appeared before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. It is Fauci’s first appearance before a legislative body since Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) released the diary Fauci kept using his government email account. The session quickly erupted into fireworks, as Chairman Paul had Anthony Fauci’s attorney removed for not following the directions of the chair.

Fauci used his own opening statement to defend his decades in government, noting that he had testified before or briefed Congress “well over 200 times” during his almost 40 years running the National Institute of Allergy and Infections Diseases and framing that record as proof he “believe[s] in and respect[s] the value of legitimate congressional oversight.”

‘The COVID lockdown … could never have been inflicted without you aiding and abetting the crime.’

He wasted no time going after Paul, accusing him of an “unhinged obsession” with trying to see him “behind bars.” Fauci framed the whole hearing as bad faith, saying it was designed to get him to “say something — anything — that could vindicate” Paul’s public pledges.

He also went after the publication of his email diary directly, calling it a move “aimed at embarrassing and intimidating me.”

In his opening statement, Paul reminded the room that Fauci only showed up “under duress” and later baited him on the record: “Let the record record that the witness has refused to answer whether there’s a folder in front of him.”

“The COVID lockdown … could never have been inflicted without you aiding and abetting the crime,” Paul said.

Invoking his Fifth Amendment right, Fauci said, after Paul began direct questioning, “under the advice of my attorneys, I will invoke my right under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution to refrain from answering your questions.”

RELATED: Puppy love: Diary exposes Fauci’s crush on Julia Roberts

Things then boiled over when one of Fauci’s attorneys tried to jump in mid-hearing. Paul cut him off cold — “Sit quietly and don’t say another word. … You are not recognized” — before warning him a second time that he would be removed if he spoke again.

The lawyer kept talking anyway. “Security, please remove him from the room,” Paul ordered. The standoff dragged on for over a minute before security pulled him out and the room broke into applause.

Democrat Gary Peters, the committee’s ranking member, tried to intervene on the attorney’s behalf. Paul overruled him on the spot.

The Fifth Amendment plea helps Fauci stay out of legal jeopardy. Former President Joe Biden’s preemptive pardon for Fauci covers offenses from 2014 through the pardon’s issue date, tied to his government service — but legal experts and lawmakers agree it does not protect against future perjury or obstructive conduct in compelled testimony.

Paul made clear days earlier that there was an easy way out: “There’s no risk to perjury if you tell the truth.” Fauci could admit to past falsehoods, destroyed records, or a one-sided presentation of the science, Paul said — “the only thing he can’t do is lie again.” Paul had also predicted the outcome, telling reporters ahead of time that Americans “would be very disappointed” if Fauci pleaded the Fifth — which he just did.

For more on Fauci’s COVID cover-up, check out BlazeTV’s six-episode docuseries “The Coverup.”

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

​Congressional hearing, Covid, Fifth amendment, Oversight, Pardon, Rand paul, Politics 

On Saturday, a 10-foot shore-break wave slammed into Seabright State Beach in Santa Cruz, California, and pulled a young boy under the water. A 16-year-old lifeguard went in anyway — a decision that, within days, would land him an invitation to the White House.

The footage runs about two minutes: the young boy disappearing under whitewater, the lifeguard disappearing with him, both surfacing again — still together — before going under once more.

‘Truly the best of America.’

Beachgoer Scott Vander Dussen caught it on his phone from start to finish.

Other swimmers tried to help and got thrown back for their trouble before a second lifeguard finally reached the pair.

NBC Bay Area identified the lifeguard as a high school student; his name is Ryder Williams.

Vander Dussen said there was no warning. One minute the water was ordinary; the next, conditions “caught a lot of people off-guard,” and the boy was gone. He said he doesn’t think the boy would have come home that night without the lifeguards who were there.

RELATED: Hero grandpa ferociously attacked by bison in viral video reveals the split-second decision that ‘saved grandson’s life’

– YouTube

The child was checked by paramedics and released to his parents.

According to Fox News, a woman claiming to be Ryder’s mother has spent the days since fielding an outpouring she didn’t ask for. She turned down a GoFundMe, saying, “He was just doing the job that he absolutely loves.” She suggested instead that people give to Santa Cruz County’s Junior Guards program, where Ryder trained.

The Guardian spoke to Ryder’s father, Shane, after the incident. “I almost started crying because how determined he was to save that boy’s life makes me so proud,” Shane Williams said during an interview.

It didn’t stay a local story for long. Eric Trump reposted the footage, calling it “truly the best of America” and saying the teen deserved the country’s highest civilian honor.

Then came the president himself. In a post on Truth Social, Trump said he plans to bring Ryder and his family to the White House — and perhaps the boy he saved — to receive a “High Civilian Honor.”

“Very brave, he deserves it,” Trump added.

“I got the chills watching this,” Trump Administrator for the U.S. Agency for Global Media Kari Lake said on social media. “So many heroic, incredible men putting themselves in danger to save a life. God bless them all — especially the 16-year-old lifeguard.”

“PROOF the world still needs strong, courageous men!” Chad Prather chimed in, adding that the lifeguard is a “true American hero.”

The rescue has also revived a running argument in Santa Cruz over how lifeguards get classified. Ryder’s mother is among those who think lifeguards working coastlines like this one should be recognized as first responders.

Ryder, a first-season lifeguard, was already back at his post the next day — back to business as usual, according to KION Central Coast.

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

​Lifeguard, White house, Donald trump, Politics, Rescue 

Evangelist Cliffe Knechtle has spent decades facilitating open-air dialogues about Christianity on college campuses, and what he’s noticed is a massive change over the years.

“People are more emotionally fragile today than they were when we began back in the ’80s and ’90s,” he tells BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey on “Relatable.”

While his father grew up in Switzerland, “sat up in the Alps with a gun,” and watched Hitler’s army march toward his country — his grandfather was defending on the frontlines.

It was anything but fragile.

“Today, when Donald Trump wins the election, university students go to a crying room to get counseling. Give me a break. What emotional fragility. What an incredible emotional weakness today compared to the young 18-year-olds who fought against Adolf Hitler,” Knechtle explains.

But that’s not all that’s changed.

“Sexual immorality is embraced in a way that it’s not sexual immorality. It’s normal. So moral relativism and sexual immorality has become so commonplace, that if you stand against that, you are really, really, weird.”

Lastly, he says, “What has become too firmly entrenched is unless you can prove it scientifically, it’s not true.”

“I don’t care if you’re a liberal, you know very well that your critique of the conservatives is a moral, ethical critique. You’re not letting enough immigrants in. You’re elitist. And the conservatives are the same way. And you live a sexually twisted life, a perverted life,” he explains.

“So both are appealing to the moral argument, which I think is exciting because it really shows that we do have consciences, which means there really is a God,” he continues.

His son, Stuart Knechtle, recalls a moment when he was cornered by group of progressives who were distraught that he believed a suicidal 16-year-old girl should be saved.

“That’s devaluing her freedom and autonomy. If anything, you should aid in her decision to kill herself,” he says, mimicking their argument.

“I was shell-shocked, completely shocked,” he says.

“Sure enough, we kind of got around to the point of, ‘Do you guys really mean this?’ … I think they go to the point of starting to realize just what they were saying. And they were relativizing morality, objective value,” he explains.

“That’s the one that I see where personal autonomy and freedom is considered really the top idea and thing to pursue even more so than the value of human life,” he 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.

​Autonomy, Christianity, God, Human life, Immigrants, Moral relativism, Progressives, Cliffe knechtle, Blazetv show 

Pope Leo XIV has overseen a shakeup at the Vatican sure to vex progressives: assigning an American conservative who has fought against the LGBT agenda and abortion activism to the Catholic Church’s highest court.

Weeks after excommunicating all members of the Society of St. Pius X and declaring it a schismatic sect, the Vatican announced a number of resignations and appointments.

‘It is a position of great prestige and trust within the Catholic Church.’

While declining to renew the term of Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark — a progressive cleric who has tipped his biretta to the LGBT community and championed migrant causes — Pope Leo XIV appointed on July 25 seven new members to the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura.

Among the new members are a pair of American bishops — San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone and Bishop Edward Lohse of Kalamazoo — and two Spanish canon lawyers who belong to Opus Dei, a conservative Catholic institution.

These appointments do not require a relocation to Rome.

Maggie Gallagher, executive director of the Cordileone-founded Benedict XVI Institute for Sacred Music and Divine Worship, told Blaze News that “the Apostolic Signatura is essentially the Supreme Court of the Catholic Church (except that the Pope may intervene and overturn a court ruling).”

“It doesn’t issue rulings on Catholic teachings, but on cases against individuals including for example judgements of nullity for marriages, and charges against other judges, etc,” continued Gallagher. “It is a position of great prestige and trust within the Catholic Church and the appointment of Archbishop Cordileone is clear indication that Pope Leo appreciates his competence and his leadership.”

Gallagher added that Archbishop Cordileone’s appointment “does not mean of course that the Pope agrees with all the positions he has taken, but he is clearly signaling that these views do not put you on the outs with Rome, and that is a great relief to many Catholics in the United States, especially for Catholics attached to the traditional Latin Mass.”

Cordileone, the San Diego native whom President Donald Trump appointed last year to serve on the advisory board of the White House’s Religious Liberty Commission, is the archbishop who was harassed by California radicals for denying communion to Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), a professed Catholic within the Archdiocese of San Francisco.

RELATED: ‘It’s insanity’: Massachusetts Democrats pass bill that would make it open season on viable babies

Franco Origlia/Getty Images

In May 2022, Archbishop Cordileone — who has referred to abortion in America as a “genocide on life in the womb” — provided Pelosi with a refresher on the Church’s moral teaching that abortion is a “grave moral evil,” and stressed that there can be no more extreme example of “throwaway culture” than “when direct attacks on human life are enshrined in a nation’s law, celebrated by society, and even paid for by the government.”

Citing canon law — which states that those “obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion” — as well as the instruction of Pope Benedict XVI, the American archbishop said it was his responsibility to bar the Democrat from what the Catechism of the Catholic Church calls the “source and summit of the Christian life”:

After numerous attempts to speak with her to help her understand the grave evil she is perpetrating, the scandal she is causing, and the danger to her own soul she is risking, I have determined that the point has come in which I must make a public declaration that she is not to be admitted to Holy Communion unless and until she publicly repudiate her support for abortion ”rights” and confess and receive absolution for her cooperation in this evil in the sacrament of Penance.

Pelosi remained unrepentant and attacked Archbishop Cordileone on the network then known as MSNBC, complaining, “Our archbishop has been vehemently against LGBTQ rights too.”

Archbishop Cordileone is on the radar of GLAAD and other non-straight activist organizations, not only for his defense of the Catholic teaching that “all sexual acts outside of a marriage between one man and one woman are morally wrong and do not serve the good of the person or society,” but for his rejection of gender ideology, long-standing defense of the institution of marriage, and advocacy for protecting the First Amendment freedoms of those opposed to the LGBT agenda.

In addition to holding fast to the teachings of the Church, Archbishop Cordileone has called — especially in the wake of the SSPX schism — for greater Catholic access to the traditional Latin Mass.

Archbishop Cordileone said in a statement on Saturday, “I am deeply grateful to the Holy Father, Pope Leo XIV, for this appointment as a member of the Supreme Apostolic Signatura. I receive this responsibility with a profound sense of stewardship, recognizing that every office in the Church is entrusted for the service of Christ, His people, and the mission of the Gospel.”

“The Supreme Apostolic Signatura assists the Holy Father in safeguarding the proper administration of justice within the life of the Church,” continued the archbishop. “Justice in the Church is never merely legal; it is ordered toward the salvation of souls, the protection of the rights of the faithful, and the strengthening of ecclesial communion. I am honored to contribute to that important mission.”

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

​Catholic church, Nancy pelosi, Pope leo xiv, Salvatore cordileone, San francisco, Faith, Politics 

The pivotal battle over one of two Texas seats in the U.S. Senate may be decided by new accusations of election fraud against the Democratic candidate.

State Rep. James Talarico is being accused of falsely using his mother’s address in Austin in 2021 to elude residency requirements and run in the Democrat-leaning district.

‘He is a lying politician who has been deceiving voters throughout his time in office, so it should come as no shock that he continues his flip-flop tour across the state of Texas.’

Talarico announced on Oct. 13, 2021, that he would move back to state House District 50, just one month ahead of the Nov. 8, 2021, deadline for him to meet the one-year residency requirement for the 2022 election.

At the time, he blamed Republicans for redrawing state House District 52, which he then represented, into one that was more red-leaning.

“Republicans have gerrymandered me out of my district. If they think they can keep me off the House floor, they better think again,” he wrote on social media.

The Federalist report, citing Texas voter registration files, claimed that Talarico registered to vote at his mother’s Austin address in December 2021, well after the deadline, and used her address “on election forms,” then purchased a home in state House District 50 after the primary in March 2022.

“There’s no evidence, sources say, that Talarico lived at his mother’s home during the period. Even if he did, the candidate would have to have resided there for at least a year before launching his House campaign,” the Federalist reported.

Voter registration for Talarico dated December 2021 listed an Austin address, according to images shared by the Dallas Express. He was previously registered in Round Rock, Texas, according to the images.

Current records with the Texas Secretary of State list a P.O. box in Austin as Talarico’s address for the March 2022 Democratic primary.

The unmarried candidate also reportedly shares an individual checking account with his mother. His campaign reported receiving an in-kind donation from Talarico’s parents of $1,437.84 for moving expenses in December 2021, according to the Dallas Express.

Five years later, he’s facing difficult questions about whether he actually met that residency requirement.

“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,” Attorney General Ken Paxton wrote on social media.

His campaign did not respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.

Madison Cercy, a spokeswoman for the Paxton campaign, did not hold back in a statement to the Federalist.

RELATED: James Talarico’s WOKE CHURCH raises money to fund abortions and transgender summer camp for children

“It is absolutely disgusting that James Talarico used his mother’s address to not only commit voter fraud, but also to defraud his entire constituency, all so he could run in a safe Democrat seat,” she said. “He is a lying politician who has been deceiving voters throughout his time in office, so it should come as no shock that he continues his flip-flop tour across the state of Texas.”

A recent Democrat-aligned poll said Talarico had a five-point advantage over Paxton, but the Decision Desk voter probability has Paxton as a slight favorite over the Democrat.

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

​Election fraud, James talarico, Ken paxton, Us senate election, Politics 

It was 1903, and Theodore Roosevelt had a problem. The Sherman Antitrust Act, passed in 1890, was effectively dead. It had been used rarely, and when it had been, cases moved sluggishly through the courts. Roosevelt wished to move forward on a multitude of what he believed to be monopolies, including in railroads and energy.

Roosevelt was not wrong to be concerned with monopoly. Coming out of the Civil War, America’s Gilded Age had moved the country lurchingly from a regional power to a global power, one that would soon dominate the world.

America’s antitrust laws simply are not built for these technologies and economic sectors.

But with that explosion of commerce came its domination by a few select companies. And while Roosevelt’s predecessor, William McKinley, had repeatedly urged Congress to crack down on them, it was mostly to no avail. By the time Roosevelt took the reins of power in 1901, several companies effectively ran entire industries.

His problem was solved by Congress, which quickly passed what became known as the Expediting Act. The bill, passed unanimously, allowed for the attorney general to declare a given antitrust case to be of national importance. This in turn mandated the creation of a special three-judge panel on what would today be the level of district courts. After that hearing, which was to be “given precedence over others and in every way expedited,” an appeal could only be levied at the Supreme Court.

Roosevelt and his successor, William Howard Taft, launched a bevy of antitrust cases, breaking apart railroad, cigarette, and energy companies. Americans alive in the 21st century may find it difficult to imagine just how powerful these Gilded Age companies were.

Standard Oil controlled roughly 90% of all oil production in America. American Tobacco produced and sold 86% of all cigarettes in the entire country. And the Northern Securities Company governed effectively all freight railroads from Chicago to the Pacific Northwest. By the end of Taft’s term, none of those companies would exist.

RELATED: America needs heroes who do not apologize for being heroes

Heritage Art/Heritage Images/Getty Images

Eventually, the Expediting Act became a victim of its own success: The large trusts were broken apart, with few — such as the Bell telephone system — existing into the latter half of the 20th century. Eventually, the lack of large antitrust cases gave way to smaller cases filled with minutiae. This, plus complaints from the Supreme Court about its supposedly immense workload, led to the bill’s repeal in the 1980s, with antitrust cases ultimately being treated like other civil suits.

Today, the oil industry remains broken up, and no one is concerned about a single cigarette company dominating that industry. But like the turn of the 20th century, there are entirely new industries and economic sectors that have sprung up — and along with them have come entirely new monopolies.

Thirty years ago, the notion that a single company could dominate an online search index would be unfathomable. That the same company could dominate browsers and other aspects of the internet would likewise be difficult to imagine. Amazon, meanwhile, controls America’s book market and facilitates the sale of a majority of all books sold in the United States.

And there are other even more dangerous monopolies that could develop, like in artificial intelligence. OpenAI was founded just over 10 years ago. Its main rival, Anthropic, was only founded in 2021, meaning that it has existed for less time than the United States government has been suing Google. Google, for what it’s worth, owns 14% of Anthropic.

With the speed at which AI is developing, it is not outside the realm of possibility that an AI company controlling an AGI-level large-language model, or beyond, would be able to monopolize the artificial intelligence sector — an extremely concerning prospect, made all the more concerning by the fact that America’s antitrust laws simply are not built for these technologies and economic sectors.

RELATED: The path to America-first AI

Yunping Iiang/Getty Images

While antitrust laws clearly need to be revamped — the foundational law, upon which many antitrust cases are still brought, was passed in 1890 — a quick and relatively easy solution would be a return to the Expediting Act, with small updates to match our current judicial structures.

Forcing judges to put antitrust cases first and move quickly on them — as opposed to taking months to mull over decisions — along with speedy hearings by the Supreme Court would help preemptively prepare America for the possibility of 21st-century monopolization.

The Supreme Court’s original concern over its workload should be discarded. When the American republic was new, government was not year-round. Congress was out of session for months on end. The president, far from barnstorming the country as they do today, stayed in Washington or simply went home when Congress was out of session. The Supreme Court had a similarly light schedule. This was all in keeping with the times, when things simply moved slowly.

But as speeds have increased, so too have government workloads. Today, Congress — though lawmakers take Fridays off — is in Washington far more often, and the presidency is now a 24/7 job.

But the Supreme Court’s calendar still sits empty for multiple months of the year, with bursts of work coming throughout. If the court will have to hear a handful of cases the attorney general deems to be of critical importance, the justices may have to suffer the indignity of having only two months of uninterrupted vacation as opposed to three.

There is something for everyone in bringing back the Expediting Act. Investors and employees will no longer be left in limbo for years as merger trials drag on and on. Antitrust advocates will not need to wait endlessly for results. And America will be better equipped to deal with sudden monopolies that, in our increasingly fast-paced world, can come about in a flash.

No one benefits from slow antitrust hearings. Congress should pass a new version of the Expediting Act and make antitrust fast again.

​American republic, Anthropic, Antitrust laws, Artificial intelligence, Energy companies, Google, Openai, Supreme court, Theodore roosevelt, Amazon, Monopolies, Opinion & analysis 

Radical Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener may have sworn off campaign support from law enforcement unions in California — yet these same unions are still financing Wiener’s anti-cop and pro-LGBTQ agenda.

Wiener, 56, has sparked disgust and outrage across America since he joined the California Senate a decade ago. Since then, he has advocated for:

lessening the criminal penalties associated with HIV-positive prostitutes;exempting some adults who had oral or anal sex with minors from automatically registering as sex offenders;making California a “refuge” for parents who want to subject their kids to gender-related medical interventions banned in other states;eliminating mandatory minimums for opioid trafficking and other drug crimes; andS.B. 627, aka the No Secret Police Act, prohibiting most law enforcement officers in California from wearing masks that many believe protect them from doxxing.

‘Scott Wiener has shown throughout the years that he is no friend of law enforcement.’

Wiener has not even tried to hide his animus against cops. In June 2020, at the height of George Floyd hysteria, he pledged not to “accept contributions from law enforcement unions going forward.”

“Our policing/criminal justice system is broken & needs drastic change,” he claimed at the time.

“This system kills/harms countless people, esp people of color. We need to do more & I’m committed to this fight,” he added.

And yet police union dollars are still flowing his way.

How? The Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender Caucus Leadership Fund, a political committee for the California Legislative LGBTQ Caucus. Wiener currently sits on the caucus and previously served as chair.

Since January 2020, the respective political action committees of the Peace Officers Research Association of California, the California Correctional Peace Officers Association, and the California Association of Highway Patrolmen have donated a whopping $210,000 total to the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender Caucus Leadership Fund, state records show.

During that same period, state filings show that the LGBT caucus fund donated $11,000 directly to Wiener’s campaign committees and spent an additional $27,000 in independent expenditures supporting his 2020 re-election bid.

The leaders of the California Legislative LGBTQ Caucus; the chair of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender Caucus Leadership Fund; and representatives from PORAC, CCPOA, and CAHP did not respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.

In addition to his seat on the LGBT caucus, Wiener also currently serves as chair of the state Senate Elections and Constitutional Amendments Committee and just a month ago killed a bill that would have barred anyone who “has ever been required to register as a sex offender” from running for elective office in California.

The bill passed 60-0 in the California Assembly, where Democrats outnumber Republicans 60 to 19.

Wiener voted against the bill because he thought it ought to apply only to Tier 3 registrants, the worst sex offenders.

Of note, Tier 1 offenses can include misdemeanor child pornography. Just this year, Rene Campos, a registered sex offender who pled no contest to possessing obscene matter depicting a minor in sexual conduct, nearly qualified to run for Fresno City Council but failed to gather the necessary 20 signatures.

Campos confirmed to Blaze News that he fully intends to “run again.”

“Does equal protection still mean equal protection when the person invoking it is unpopular? Under the same sun, no one is above the law — and no one should stand outside its protection,” Campos wrote in an email. “I believe every person stands equal before the law.”

RELATED: Fresno candidate’s registered child sex offender status sparks outrage after city council campaign launch

Rene Campos. California Sex Offender Registry screenshot

Many rank-and-file members of law enforcement have been frustrated that so much union largesse has been dedicated to Democrats like Wiener who seemingly make cops look like the bad guys and sex offenders look like victims.

Sgt. Tony Romo, who has spent nearly 40 years as a deputy and a detective in Los Angeles, told Blaze News that he resigned from the board of the Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers Association in 2023, partially because the group was “selling out the members” with some of its “relationships with politicians.”

Romo claimed that lawmakers in Sacramento are passing bills that “handcuff” police officers and that police unions are helping facilitate this anti-cop legislation through financial support.

“These bills are being passed, and the unions are basically getting rolled over on [them]. And they’re not fighting the leadership. They just kind of want to go to status quo,” Romo explained.

Sgt. Tony Romo. LA County Sheriff’s Department

Romo also claimed that while he was still on the board, the L.A. County PPOA discussed donating to Wiener even after Wiener renounced all police union support in June 2020. Each time Wiener’s name came up, Romo and another board member would immediately reject it because of Wiener’s anti-cop activism, Romo said.

“Scott Wiener has shown throughout the years that he is no friend of law enforcement. Absolutely, he’s more of a nemesis to law enforcement. And if he had it his way, there would be probably no law enforcement. So it’s our duty to support our membership, and it’s not to support any senator, assemblyman, congressman that is doing the exact opposite of that,” Romo said.

State filings show PPOA donated $21,000 directly to Wiener’s re-election campaigns between June 2016 and July 2018 but has not made a direct donation to Wiener’s campaigns since.

Sen. Wiener is now running for the congressional seat former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D) has held since 1987, representing most of San Francisco.

Wiener’s campaign and PPOA did not respond to a request for comment.

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

​California, California senate, Nancy pelosi, Scott wiener, Politics 

The president’s executive order “Ushering in the Next Frontier of Quantum Innovation” arrived in language that sounded both urgent and inevitable. Americans have always needed a frontier. Close the continental one and you get the endless frontier of Vannevar Bush, who argued in 1945 that basic science was the territory left to settle.

Now, 81 years later, the covered wagons are cryostats … and the territory is quantum.

Hype is a strategic tool for securing funding.

And what, exactly, is quantum? We’ll get to that.

President Trump signed executive order 14413 on June 22, 2026. The stated goal is to make the United States the world’s quantum “superpower,” a word that does not appear in the order itself but in the accompanying fact sheet, in which ambitions are permitted to be louder. The order proper is more bureaucratic and more interesting, directing the creation of a national quantum strategy within 180 days and demanding technical specifications for a scientifically transformative quantum computer within 90 days. It orders sensor deployment plans extending to September 2028 and establishes the Quantum Computer for Application Development and Discovery Science effort, which aims to deliver at least one machine to a Department of Energy facility where real scientists can use it for real problems. The order is less a building than a set of blueprints.

Federal quantum policy is actually not new. Spending on quantum information science rose from $456 million in fiscal year 2019 to over a billion by 2023. The 2018 National Strategic Overview had already laid out grand challenges, workforce initiatives, and international cooperation frameworks. A 2009 vision document warned, with admirable prescience, that quantum technologies could render existing data-protection schemes obsolete. The new order tightens this apparatus. The posture shifts from encouragement to expectation, from “let us coordinate” to “let us specify what we are building and whether it works.”

Confidence or con?

Quantum computing has suffered from a particular condition: The distance between what is promised and what is delivered is large, and the people doing the promising know it. Physicists have acknowledged, in terms more candid than one might expect, that hype is a strategic tool for securing funding. DARPA, not an institution given to sentiment, created a Quantum Benchmarking Initiative whose purpose is to determine whether anyone’s machine can actually do something worth its cost by 2033. The executive order’s insistence on specifications, benchmarking centers, and public assessment institutions is therefore a response to a credibility problem. The government is trying to build institutions that can tell the difference between a breakthrough and a press release.

RELATED: Smartphone and laptop prices are rising. Buy now before they go higher.

Crovik Media/Getty Images

The underlying physics explains why quantum computing is so difficult. A qubit, the fundamental unit of quantum information, can exist in a superposition of states, which permits certain computations to proceed in ways unavailable to classical machines. The trouble is that qubits are extraordinarily fragile. They decohere; their gates fail; their measurements are imperfect. The central engineering challenge is error correction: combining many noisy physical qubits into fewer, cleaner logical qubits whose effective error rates are low enough to be useful. Google reported a 101-qubit surface code that exceeded the lifetime of its best physical qubit by a factor of 2.4. Microsoft and Quantinuum demonstrated logical qubits with better-than-physical error rates on a trapped-ion processor.

These are genuine achievements, but are only way stations, and the order reflects an awareness that a useful quantum computer cannot be defined by qubit count alone. Instead, such a computer must be described in terms of gate fidelity, decoder latency, circuit depth, error-correction overhead, and performance on actual workloads. The romance of the blackboard gives way to the actuality of engineering and manufacturing.

The break and the fix

Trump’s order treats quantum as a material civilization project, with supply-chain analyses, foundry access, domestic component development, and critical minerals, speaking of readiness, deployment, and trusted supply chains. Quantum policy is now a cousin of semiconductor policy, another domain in which the distance between theoretical capability and industrial reality turned out to be the whole story. The order also folds in workforce provisions: recruitment strategies, labor-market tracking, apprenticeships, and a network of national training institutes. Talent, chips, standards, and secrecy are treated as a single policy field.

There is a tension at the heart of the order. On the same day as the president’s signature, the White House issued a companion order on advanced cryptographic attacks. The reason is straightforward and unsettling. A sufficiently powerful quantum computer could break the public-key cryptography on which much of modern privacy, commerce, and infrastructure depends. NIST finalized its first three post-quantum cryptography standards in August 2024. Migration, the agency stresses, must begin now. The government is doing two things simultaneously: accelerating the technology that could undermine the current architecture of trust and building a new architecture of trust designed to survive the technology it is accelerating. The government has decided that the technology is too important to forgo and too dangerous to leave unsecured.

​Tech, Quantum, Computing 

An Amber Alert on Monday led to the shooting death of a man who allegedly abducted a 13-year-old girl from her home in Ocala, Florida.

The Marion County Sheriff’s Office said that 45-year-old Jason Castillo had been identified as a possible suspect after the Amber Alert for Juliet Louise Arioso was issued in the morning.

Castillo was shot by 8 sheriff’s deputies and 1 officer while they tried to take him into custody.

Police believe Castillo had abducted Arioso from the Shady Road Villas community between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m.

At about 5:20 p.m., deputies spotted the red 2021 Hyundai Santa Fe and tried to pull Castillo over, but he refused and tried to speed away.

Officers performed a precision immobilization technique, commonly known as a PIT maneuver, that disabled the SUV on U.S. Highway 441.

Castillo was shot by eight sheriff’s deputies and one officer while they tried to take him into custody.

He was transported to a hospital, where he was later declared dead.

Arioso was found safe and returned to her home.

Marion County Sheriff Billy Woods later said that a citizen notified police when they saw the car described in the Amber Alert, and police were also aided by a license plate reader.

Woods said Castillo produced a handgun when the officers confronted him. The video they released shows him pointing the gun at police.

“I couldn’t be more proud of my deputies,” Woods said. “When that little girl needed them, they answered the call. They worked every lead, used every tool available, and they didn’t quit until she was safe.”

RELATED: Texas man arrested in connection to 12-year-old who went missing after getting into strange truck in the middle of the night

Castillo’s family released a statement about his death.

“We love him regardless of what he has done over the years no matter what a loss is a loss! Don’t take this as we supported his acts. But we did care about him and wished him better. I grew up with him as a huge part of my close family and it really sucks knowing he is gone,” the statement reads.

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

​Amber alert, Child abduction, Florida man, Officer shooting, Crime 

As the shooting war with Iran enters its sixth month, the United States continues to smash Iran’s military — and lose the information war in Iran, at home, and around the world.

American forces can strike targets across Iran and hit Tehran’s regional allies, especially the Houthis in Yemen. By every conventional military measure, Iran is taking severe losses. Yet a growing domestic and international audience believes Tehran is fighting the United States to a standstill.

The Iranian officials would earn an A in my information-warfare seminar. Too many American officials would earn an F

It is not. But Iran is winning the argument over what the war means.

Too many senior American officials still treat television — whether broadcast or streamed — as a record of an event rather than a battlefield in its own right. The War Department approaches global visual media as if it were still 1991 and Desert Storm. That must change.

U.S. military planners still tend to think in Clausewitzian terms: War is politics conducted through the controlled application of violence. That formulation reflected the technology of the early 19th century. It does not account for an information age in which images cross the globe in milliseconds and political effects can precede, outweigh, or even replace battlefield effects.

I call this form of conflict SOFTWAR: the hostile use of global visual media to shape another society’s will by changing its view of reality. Three colleagues and I have taught this form of warfare to generations of students at U.S. war, staff, and intelligence colleges since the early 1990s. Too few American institutions adapted.

Iran did. Its military and intelligence apparatus has embraced the concept since at least 2003 and even adopted the American-coined term in its own publications and influence operations.

That helps explain why the United States has spent billions of dollars over five months while Iranian drone and missile attacks — and Tehran’s televised defiance — continue. Washington is using Cold War systems and industrial-age doctrine against an asymmetric enemy organized for the infosphere.

Iran’s theocratic dictatorship is fighting a four-dimensional guerrilla war across land, sea, air, and information. Its military losses have limited its ability to retaliate directly against U.S. forces. Its remaining attacks are therefore chosen less for battlefield effect than for global media impact.

Oil tankers and cargo ships in the Strait of Hormuz, a desalination plant and power station in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia’s state-owned oil hub, a liquefied natural gas facility in Qatar, a U.S. communications center in Jordan, and American naval facilities in Bahrain all produce frightening images and headlines.

RELATED: The only Iran plan that doesn’t end with a 20-year hangover

Marcin Golba/NurPhoto/Getty Images

Iran times its scattered counterattacks for its own early-morning hours so the images arrive during the American prime-time news cycle. The objective is not merely to damage a target. It is to shape the story told about the war here, there, and everywhere.

The United States helps Tehran by concentrating almost exclusively on visible military targets while leaving the regime’s domestic television system intact. Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting continues to push the mullahs’ account across dozens of television channels and through its official news operation.

Washington destroys weapons and commanders but fails to contest the information environment that gives those losses political meaning. It has not destroyed the transmitters and replaced the regime’s message with one aimed directly at the Iranian people.

Those people are the regime’s real engine: a population that has endured repression and the reported killing of tens of thousands of anti-government demonstrators. Outside the relatively small number of Iranians with access to Starlink, the United States has no coherent way to speak to them at scale.

America does not lack the technology. The military weakened its own capacity. In 2024, it retired the EC-130J aircraft of the 193rd Special Operations Wing, the only U.S. airborne radio and television broadcast platform. The aircraft were judged too vulnerable for modern combat, but no announced drone replacement has taken over the mission.

The result is overwhelming kinetic power without a direct means of reaching the Iranian public. It is the doctrine of a mechanic who responds to an engine-warning light by cutting the wire to the bulb. The warning disappears. The engine keeps failing.

Meanwhile, Iranian propagandists study the American audience, especially younger people hostile to the Trump administration, and target them with AI-generated Lego-character videos. The goal is to unite disparate factions, erode domestic support for the war, and influence the midterm elections.

America needs a genuinely four-dimensional military capable of operating on land, at sea, in the air, and throughout the infosphere. Information warfare should organize and direct the campaign, with kinetic operations supporting strategic influence objectives — not the other way around. Iran already understands the hierarchy.

RELATED: Memo to Hegseth: Military education needs a strategic makeover

Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu/Getty Images

Its officials also understand presentation.

When Iranian military figures such as Brigadier General Ebrahim Zolfaghari or Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps spokesman Abolfazl Shekarchi address the public, they are usually seated behind a desk with the Iranian flag visible. Their uniforms are immaculate, their beards trimmed, and their faces dramatically lit. Most important, they look through the camera lens directly at the audience. This is television 101.

Viewers who speak no Farsi still receive the intended message: discipline, seriousness, and defiance.

American military spokesmen too often squander the same opportunity. They ignore, disdain, or have never learned the skills needed to communicate effectively on television.

General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is informed and capable. But at his Pentagon press conferences, his televised manner resembles a squadron commander consulting his notes while briefing the weather to the first three rows.

He should address the millions watching beyond the room. Put the camera a few feet away, frame him from mid-bicep to just above the head, and have him look through the lens to establish direct eye contact with the intended audience. Reporters can sit to either side. The difference would be immediate.

Admiral Brad Cooper, commander of U.S. Central Command, makes a similar mistake. He often appears in green camouflage designed to defeat electro-optical observation — including television — rather than the Navy service uniform designed to convey authority, experience, and command. He also stands too far from the camera for viewers to read his face.

His folksy Ozzie Nelson manner may work before Congress or the Navy League. It does not put an enemy on his heels.

RELATED: The future of warfare is not what you think

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth should know better. The former Fox News host needs a tighter camera shot and a visual style designed for wartime communication rather than his old television demographic.

His current presentation is crowded with distractions: a tight European-cut suit, patterned tie, clashing flag pocket square, and hair product that makes his scalp glisten under studio lights. His deep-set eyes require careful lighting. Without it, viewers may read strain or evasiveness where none exists.

Alfred Hitchcock understood the rule: Dress the leading man simply and light him properly so the audience watches the man rather than the costume. Cary Grant in “North by Northwest” remains the model.

The Iranian officials would earn an A in my information-warfare seminar. Too many American officials would earn an F — and three hours of detention.

That needs to change right now.

The United States is not losing the military contest with Iran. It is losing the contest over what the world believes the military contest means.

A nation can destroy every designated target and still lose the war if its enemy controls the images, timing, and story. Information warfare is not an elective. It is the core course.

America, so far, is failing.

​Iran, Opinion & analysis, Pete hegseth, Tehran, Television, United states, War department, Yemen, Information war, Propaganda, Dan caine, Brad cooper 

Two summers ago, our team at the Oversight Project sat in a conference room asking the same question as the rest of the country: How were they running the government with a broken president?

That was before Joe Biden’s complete malfunction on the debate stage. Even then, we were confident he could not sustain a full re-election campaign. We began examining whether state election laws would permit Democrats to replace him after key ballot deadlines. Leaked Democratic National Committee memos showed that the prospect had already alarmed both pro- and anti-Biden factions.

The silence on the tapes speaks loudly. It suggests knowing and willful conduct, not an innocent paperwork mistake.

As a clip of Biden stumbling played on the television, someone asked the lawyer’s question: How were they moving paper through the White House, and could Biden even sign it?

After a brief silence, someone answered: Probably an autopen. Let’s find the documents and calendars and figure it out.

The rest became what President Trump has called the scandal of the century: congressional investigations, Justice Department and White House inquiries, evidence of the extraordinary lengths Biden’s aides took to conceal his condition, and even the rearrest of violent felons who should never have received autopenned commutations.

Accountability, however, has remained elusive.

Which is infuriating. What happened during the Biden years was wrong, harmful, and in many instances unlawful. The Constitution vests presidential authority in one person. That person must possess both the capacity and the awareness to authorize official acts. The entire system depends on fixing responsibility on the president whom the voters chose.

That did not happen. For a country that has spent decades lecturing the world about democracy, the Biden presidency became an embarrassment at home.

Monday brought a measure of accountability. After more than two years of litigation, the Biden tapes were released to the American people.

Joe Biden and his well-funded legal team fought us in federal district court and on appeal. We won both times. Biden could have asked the Supreme Court to intervene, but he finally surrendered. His lawyers had so much time and money that they devoted pages of legal filings to posts from my X feed and that of my colleague Jeff Clark, apparently hoping to discredit us before the court. I will always enjoy knowing that the Biden team paid an aspiring left-wing lawyer to study my unvarnished thoughts.

RELATED: Biden audio tapes have just been released — and it’s not good for Joe

Mandel Ngan/Pool/Getty Images

What does the release of the tapes mean?

First, it pushes the timeline of Biden’s decline back to 2016 and 2017.

The recordings capture Biden’s interviews with ghostwriter Mark Zwonitzer while the two worked on Biden’s memoir, “Promise Me, Dad.” They were made within six months of Biden leaving the vice presidency. On the tapes, Biden forgets the name of Rep. Jim Clyburn, the man who would later rescue his 2020 campaign. He repeatedly says, “I’m so confused” and, “I can’t remember.”

The good days and bad days that defined his presidency were already apparent in 2017. The recordings contain so many pauses and verbal stalls that Biden sounds like a dial-up connection trying to buffer.

That helps explain why the 2020 campaign used COVID-19 as cover to keep him in the basement. Had Biden been forced to speak publicly and off the cuff throughout that campaign, his decline might have become as obvious then as it was during the 2024 debate. Democratic leaders knew they were selling damaged goods long before the public finally saw the label.

Second, the tapes raise serious questions about special counsel Robert Hur’s investigation into Biden’s handling of classified information.

Hur declined to prosecute, concluding that a jury would view Biden as a “sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” Yet the recordings reveal conduct more serious than Hur’s public account suggested.

At several points, Biden acknowledges that the material before him may be classified. The audio then cuts to long stretches of silence redacted for national security reasons. These are not isolated interruptions. Classified redactions cover substantial portions of the recordings.

The transcripts indicate that Biden disclosed information involving the CIA, the Defense Department, and other sensitive national security matters to a ghostwriter who lacked both a security clearance and authorization to receive it. Biden made those disclosures while pursuing a book deal worth $8 million.

The silence on the tapes speaks loudly. It suggests knowing and willful conduct, not an innocent paperwork mistake. The recordings justify a fresh examination of whether Hur’s investigation was designed to uncover the full truth or to contain a politically explosive scandal.

RELATED: Biden freed killers with a pen he didn’t even hold

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Third, the tapes open the door to criminal inquiries.

Biden told the American people that he “did not share classified information” with his ghostwriter. The tapes contradict that statement. Knowing and willful disclosure of national defense information to an unauthorized person can constitute a federal crime. Unlike a witness with a failing memory, a recording does not need to testify.

The inquiry should not stop with Biden. His White House mobilized in 2024 to discredit Hur for accurately describing the president’s mental condition. Officials who knew the truth attacked the special counsel for saying it aloud. The autopen scandal was institutional, and accountability must extend to the aides who enabled, concealed, and benefited from it.

Investigators must reconstruct the timeline carefully. Biden was plainly diminished in 2016 and 2017, though he deteriorated further by 2024. What was his mental state when he removed classified documents from secure facilities? Did he understand that he was disclosing protected information when he said as much on tape? How did Hur evaluate intent at the time the alleged offenses occurred rather than at the time of his later interview?

Those questions demand answers.

The tapes always belonged to the American people. The Oversight Project merely delivered them to their rightful owners.

America can never again permit a presidential administration to operate by mechanized fiat. Only one person may exercise the powers of the presidency. That person must know what he is authorizing, accept responsibility for it, and actually possess the confidence of the voters who put him there.

​Autopen, Joe biden, Oversight project, Justice department, Robert hur, Classified documents, Donald trump, National security, Opinion & analysis