Category: blaze media

An English farmer may have foiled an anti-American terror plot over the weekend, and according to President Donald Trump, the suspects involved have been on the United States’ radar for some time.

Early Sunday morning, a farmer reported spotting three abandoned white vans blocking a country road nearby Royal Air Force Fairford — a U.S. Air Force-operated military installation in Gloucestershire, England, that is home to the 501st Combat Support Wing and 420th Air Base Squadron.

‘Thank God we spotted them.’

The farmer told the Telegraph that she circled back for another look, then “saw a group of Middle Eastern-looking young guys running off through the trees. Some of them had masks or balaclavas on, and they all scattered ahead of us as we drove back past.”

Just minutes after the farmer called police, armed officers swooped in and captured five alleged would-be bombers, arresting them on suspicion of committing offenses under the U.K.’s Explosives Act and of preparation of a terrorist act.

Britain’s Counter Terrorism Policing confirmed that it is investigating the incident and that the “three suspicious vehicles” appeared to have been traveling toward the military base.

“A 400m cordon has been put in place around the vehicles while the Army’s Explosive Ordinance Disposal unit conduct examinations,” Vicki Evans, the deputy assistant commissioner of CTP, said in a statement. “As a precaution, around 85 households have been evacuated whilst these examinations take place.”

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

Leon Neal/Getty Images

The Gloucestershire Constabulary noted that the suspects remain in custody.

U.S. European Command said in a statement obtained by the New York Times that it “remains vigilant and will take appropriate actions to ensure the safety and security of our U.S. service members, civilians, contractors, and their families across the European theater.”

Following the arrests, the U.S. Embassy in London issued an alert encouraging American citizens to “exercise caution and be mindful of personal security,” adding that “U.K. authorities rate the threat of terrorism in the U.K. as severe.”

“We got them,” President Donald Trump told reporters on Sunday, adding that the suspects had long been “under view.”

“The arrest in the U.K. was fantastic,” said Trump. “Working with Britain, it was an amazing job. We had them under investigation. They were looking to do big damage to our fort.”

British government sources told the Telegraph that the arrests were not the result of a pre-planned operation or intelligence.

Blaze News has reached out to the White House for comment.

British Prime Minister Andy Burnham tweeted, “I know today’s incident near RAF Fairford will be deeply concerning for local residents and for many people following developments across the country.”

After thanking police, Burnham urged the public to avoid speculating about the incident.

RAF Fairford is a key forward operating location for U.S. Air Strike Global Command and one of only a few bases in and around Europe capable of operating the American heavy bombers that have been hammering Iranian military sites in recent months.

Critics of the U.S.-Iran conflict and American forces’ presence at RAF Fairford — including climate alarmists — rallied outside the base last month, calling on Burnham to “end the use of British bases in illegal war on Iran.”

The farmer who alerted authorities about the possible terror plot said, “Thinking about it now, and what could have happened if they had tried to stop me from driving away, I am quite lucky.”

“It is pretty incredible, realizing you had a brush with potential terrorists face to face and may have foiled a terrorist plot,” she continued. “It was clear they had just got there. Thank God we spotted them.”

According to the Telegraph, one of the vans apparently had a fake company name — “Fuel 2You” — and incomplete phone number emblazoned on its side.

The company Fuel2U said in a statement on its website, “Fuel2U is aware of reports and images circulating in connection with today’s serious incident near RAF Fairford, in which a vehicle appears to display Fuel2U.”

“We want to make it absolutely clear that neither the vehicle nor any of the individuals involved has any connection whatsoever with Fuel2U, its directors, employees, or current business operations,” continued the company. “We are extremely concerned that our company’s name have [sic] been used without our knowledge or permission. We are cooperating fully with the relevant authorities and will assist them with any enquiries.”

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

​Terrorism, Iran, Donald trump, Royal air force, Us air force, Military, Andy burnham, Politics 

In 11 years, Apple Watch evolved from a fancy timepiece to a robust health-tracking platform that also fields notifications, takes calls, and handles menial tasks on your wrist. This year, Apple aimed to revamp the Watch’s health capabilities and transform it into an AI-powered hub for the new Siri. Did it succeed? Let’s find out.

At first glance, the brand-new Apple Watch Series 12 looks a lot like the models before it. It maintains the same square design that has become a familiar staple of the brand, and it keeps the larger displays first adopted in the Series 10. In fact, if anything, the appearance of Series 12 actually reverted a bit, as the physical case (body of the watch) and bezels (black border around the display) are now slightly bigger than recent models, but most folks won’t notice that from day to day.

Series 12 is the first exciting Apple Watch in years.

The new larger case is said to account for a completely redesigned health-tracking system embedded within the watch. The existing sensor array to monitor heart rate, steps, oxygen saturation, and other vital metrics has been reworked and improved. Now dubbed the Health Sensing System, it provides continuous heart rate tracking with samples collected every five seconds instead of every five minutes and heart rate variability measurements every five minutes instead of two hours. This, of course, is a huge improvement, as the new rates provide a more rounded look at heart health and overall fitness.

Apple Watch Series 12 Heart Rate Sensor/Apple

In addition to continuous heart rate tracking, Apple also conducted a study comparing Apple Watch Series 12’s heart measurement accuracy against several other wearables, including Pixel Watch, Samsung Galaxy Watch, Garmin, and Oura Ring, with a Polar chest strap used as the most accurate control option. According to Apple, Watch Series 12 most closely mirrored the chest strap, proving it to be the most accurate wearable, at least for heart rate metrics.

The new continuous heart rate sensor enables several new powerful features exclusive to Series 12. The Readiness app uses HRV, sleeping vitals, and overall fitness to estimate your body’s strain levels and indicate when you can push during your next workout or to hold back so as not to cause injury or fatigue. For the first time ever, Apple Watch also gets live step counts; in the past, the displayed number could lag behind, so this is a much-appreciated change. Finally, Series 12 is getting an AI-powered upgrade with Audio Intelligence, though we’ll talk about that more below.

RELATED: Someone else’s Apple Watch might start spying on your conversations

bombuscreative/Getty Images

My impressions so far

I’ve had an Apple Watch on my wrist since 2015, starting with Series 0. I’m an early adopter and a longtime user, so I have witnessed the Watch’s evolution from a piece of expensive jewelry to a robust health-tracking platform.

Even before Apple execs fully understood what the Apple Watch could be, fitness always seemed like the logical route. It had a display for showing data, it had a built-in gyroscope and pedometer to track movement, and it had a heart rate sensor, though back then, it was even less useful, with measurements taken every 10 minutes. Meanwhile, Fitbit and, later, Pixel Watch — after Google acquired the company — had similar devices with continuous heart rate tracking that put Apple Watch to shame.

I’ve wanted Apple Watch to add this feature for 11 years, and as the device improved with every iteration, I was sure Apple would never actually do it. The battery trade-offs were too great, or maybe the company didn’t think the data was useful enough. Who knows the reason? So when Series 12 finally shipped the feature I’ve clamored for, I had to have it.

To be honest, though, it’s not like Apple had a choice. It has been stuck in a health feature drought for years. The last meaningful innovations Apple brought to the Watch were sleep apnea notifications and the Vitals app in 2024. Before that, it was sleep tracking and blood oxygen levels for Series 6 in 2020. Other than those, Apple Watch has treaded water to the point that sales have dipped.

Apple Watch Series 12 Readiness App/Apple

While Google brought interesting features like Loss of Pulse Detection and upcoming blood pressure trends to Pixel Watch, it was becoming clear that a lack of continuous heart rate data was part of Apple Watch’s fitness stagnation.

Not any more! So far, Series 12’s heart rate measurements have been reliable and accurate, as far as I can tell. I haven’t had a chance to test the Readiness app yet, since it requires a full week of fresh data before it activates, so I’m still waiting for that. But I can already tell that this is part of the missing link in Apple’s health tracking endeavors that could open up new innovations in the future.

Another set of features oddly missing from Series 12 is Audio Intelligence. This is an entire set of attributes that use AI and Siri to listen to the environment around you to detect songs, identify certain sirens and alarms, and even take transcripts from the conversations you have in real life. Creepy, right? Maybe, but I need to test it out before I know for sure. Those are expected to arrive in beta later this year.

RELATED: This super-popular wearable is new, improved — and flawed

metamorworks/Getty Images

A final note, to my chagrin: An early batch of Series 12 Apple Watches are suffering from crashes via a kernel panic, which usually indicates a hardware failure somewhere inside the device, but it could be software too. My own Watch has force-restarted itself twice so far — the first time occurred while sitting at my desk, and the second incident happened when I tried to end a workout.

Apple hasn’t issued a statement on the suspected cause yet, but there is a chance it is just a bad glitch that can be fixed with a future update. That is what I’m hoping, at least; otherwise, my Watch is destined for a warranty replacement.

Odd bugs aside, Series 12 is the first exciting Apple Watch in years. Its new health features will redefine Apple’s position in the fitness category as it takes on Google, Whoop, and whoever else plans to challenge its dominance, and that is great for competition. It is also good for us, as the Big Tech giants try to build the best health platforms to help all of us stay healthier longer in the age of MAHA.

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

​Apple watch, Fitness, Maha, Smartwatch, Wearable tech, Tech 

Christians need not wait for Washington to settle the immigration debate before sharing the gospel with the people who have already arrived.

Whatever happens next — tighter restrictions or a return to the influxes Democrats encouraged — Hindus and Muslims have made their homes here and established temples and mosques. They are our neighbors. Christians have a duty to evangelize them.

The religions of the world have come to our neighborhoods. We have the honor of sharing Christ with the people who practice them. We should get to work.

We should debate whether a society without a shared foundation can hold together through the modern left’s thin materialistic secularism or resurgent occultism. Obviously, it cannot. We should also challenge what the left proposes to put in place of the Christianity that helped form this country.

But those arguments do not suspend the Christian obligation to share Christ. Hindu and Muslim immigrants have come to a country with a long Christian heritage. They should expect to encounter Christianity here, just as a Christian moving to India would encounter Hinduism or one moving to Saudi Arabia would encounter Islam.

Hindu statues and Islamic calls to prayer now confront Americans with religions they may once have known only from books. What a great opportunity to share Christ!

Evangelism can begin in a conversation at work or school. Christians can visit religious centers, get to know their neighbors, and preach publicly. Whatever the setting, we must understand what the other person believes and explain where Christianity differs.

Hindu traditions include worship of many deities, although Hindu schools understand those deities differently. For some American Christians, a Hindu temple may provide their first encounter with statues used in religious worship rather than displayed in a museum.

We have learned the commandment against making and worshipping idols. Yet our sermons often emphasize spiritual idolatry because bowing before a physical image seems so remote from our lives. Our Hindu neighbors may give us occasion to discuss that commandment in its most literal application.

Some influential Hindu philosophical traditions teach monism: that reality is ultimately one. Advaita Vedanta identifies the true self, Atman, with Brahman, the ultimate reality. The formulation “This Self is Brahman” appears in the Mandukya Upanishad.

Yoga and meditation are practices aimed at realizing the self is God. Reincarnation teaches that our soul has existed from eternity and is on a journey to be freed from the body and reach enlightenment as God.

RELATED: ‘I think they’re demons’: Why JD Vance refuses to downplay supernatural evil

Kent Nishimura-Pool/Getty Images

The Christian answer to identifying the self with God is direct: God created us. We are not God. Creation had a beginning; only God has existed from eternity. The temptation in Genesis 3:5 promised, “You will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

The distinction between Creator and creation also explains Christianity’s rejection of idols. Paul condemns those who “exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles” in Romans 1:23.

Idolatry calls for repentance. Salvation from that sin comes only through Christ.

Islam presents a different challenge. It has a violent history with Hinduism. It also strongly condemns idolatry. It arose after the Jewish and Christian Scriptures and claims continuity with earlier revelation. Yet it rejects the atonement at the center of the Christian gospel.

Biblical revelation teaches the need for vicarious atonement — a sacrifice on behalf of sinners. In the books of Moses, the Day of Atonement gives this teaching a central place. Passover likewise involves the death of a lamb and the application of its blood so that a household escapes judgment. Christians understand these as signs pointing to Christ, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.

Islam rejects Christ’s sacrificial death as the means of salvation. The Quran states in 6:164 that no bearer of burdens will bear another’s burden. Muslims emphasize obedience, repentance, and God’s mercy; Islamic teaching also denies that deeds alone secure entry into paradise. The Christian disagreement concerns how God reconciles sinners to himself: through the atoning death of Christ.

The biblical response is that none of our works can ever save us. Even if we became perfectly obedient today — and most of us can admit we cannot — we would still owe a debt for our past sins. Thinking future obedience can erase those sins is like thinking cutting up your credit cards pays off the balance.

God’s perfect justice and perfect mercy must both hold. Simply overlooking sin would leave justice unsatisfied. At the cross, Christ bears the penalty for sin and offers salvation to sinners who cannot save themselves. God remains just while showing mercy.

RELATED: A Christian guide to trolling without sinning

Al Drago/Bloomberg/Getty Images

Christianity explains our problem and provides the solution God has given. We need reconciliation with our Creator, and we receive it through Jesus Christ.

Our Hindu and Muslim neighbors may know Christianity chiefly through what their own religious traditions say about it. They may never have read the Bible or heard the gospel explained clearly from Scripture. American Christians can open the Bible with them and make that introduction.

We must prepare for those conversations. Evangelists on social media can make the work look easy, but years of study and practice may stand behind a short video. Read Scripture, understand its teaching, and learn to speak kindly with people who disagree.

Pray for the people you hope to reach. Our duty to share the gospel should lead us to prayer, with fasting when appropriate.

Live the Christian life yourself. You are introducing someone to the true and living God, who offers reconciliation through Jesus Christ. Know that salvation yourself before presuming to explain it to someone else.

Finally, ask questions and listen to the answers. You are speaking with a person. Learn what he believes, what he doubts, and what he understands about Christianity. A religious label cannot tell you all of that.

The religions of the world have come to our neighborhoods. We have the honor of sharing Christ with the people who practice them. We should get to work.

​Americans, Bible, Christianity, Christians, Creation, Evangelists, Gospel, Immigration, Islam, Jesus christ, Meditation, Mosques, Muslims, Quran, Sinners, Social media, Society, Worship, Opinion & analysis 

Nikole Hannah-Jones is a Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times Magazine journalist best known for creating the 1619 Project — a New York Times Magazine initiative that aims to reframe U.S. history by treating 1619 (the year the first enslaved Africans arrived in Virginia) as the genesis of the American story and arguing that slavery’s legacy still shapes American institutions.

But it appears the principles that undergird Hannah-Jones’ initiative backfired in her personal life. Earlier this week, she published an essay expressing regret that she sent her daughter to struggling, predominantly black Brooklyn public schools as a political statement.

“[Hannah-Jones] said that white kids and rich kids went to the same school because it’s much better, and that left behind other kids at the bad school,” says Glenn Beck, “so even though she could afford to send her child to the best school, she didn’t, and everybody on the left praised her for that.”

But payment for this political stunt eventually came due. Now Hannah-Jones’ daughter — 16-year-old Najya — is complaining she’s been academically cheated.

“She has missed major years of education. She’s so far behind in math now, and it’s her favorite subject, she can barely catch up even with a tutor,” says Glenn.

He imagines what Najya is saying to her mother right now: “Mom, you put your ideology ahead of me. You were making all of this money, and you were so against privilege that you wouldn’t use that money from supposedly your hard work to put me in a better school. You left me behind to make a point. You’ll fight for all the kids, but you won’t fight for me.”

Glenn, calling the story “terrible” and “devastating,” frames Najya’s undeserved fate as an example of what happens when parents “sacrifice their kids for the god of their ideology.”

By the time Nikole Hannah-Jones figured out that’s what she’d done to her daughter, “it was too late,” he says. “The damage was done; she had harmed her own child.”

Even still, Glenn doesn’t judge her.

“I don’t know if I’m any different than she is because … I sacrificed my time with my children, and I’m paying a heavy price,” he acknowledges. “All that praise that Nikole got from strangers, it didn’t mean anything. Any of the praise I get from the audience, it doesn’t mean anything.”

“The life of our children is the only thing that has meaning in the world — more meaning than any ideology,” he continues.

Unfortunately, we live in a world where ideology often ranks above the well-being of children.

“We have a generation of parents that is wrapped so tightly in the collective, they can barely see out,” says Glenn.

To hear more, watch the video above.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

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

​1619 project, Glenn beck, New york times, Racial justice, Blazetv show, Nikole hannah-jones 

How do you feel about the dentist? Do you look forward to your appointments? Do you enjoy the cost of cleanings and whatever work needs to be done? Do you enjoy the shaming the hygienist thrusts upon you when you tell her you have been flossing twice a day and she looks at you like you are lying?

I think I know your answers without even knowing you.

In the middle of the procedure this past summer, as my tooth was being hollowed out with vibrating steel, my dentist said he loves doing this kind of work the most.

We all basically feel the same about the dentist. We begrudgingly go because we have to. The consequences of not going are more frightening than lying on your back with your mouth open for 45 minutes while someone picks away at your teeth with little metal tines. A toothache is worse than an hour in the chair numbed up, and a bad smile is worse than a couple hundred bucks a year for regular cleanings.

But still, we all kind of hate the dentist.

Tooth hurty

Though I have to say that lately I have been coming around to the guy behind the mask who comes in for five minutes at the end of the appointment just to tap on a couple of teeth before telling me what I need fixed next. I suppose it’s because over the past few years I have been giving more thought to the benefits and blessings of modern medicine.

When I was younger, I kind of thought they were exaggerating at the dentist’s office about what needed to be done or how crucial it was to fix something. And while I still think there are probably dentists out there who recommend more than is necessary and very much enjoy clients willing to pay for whatever they suggest, I trust dentists more than I have at any other time in my life.

It might sound crazy, but I actually look forward to going to the dentist these days.

I had a crown done this past summer. I ate a lot of candy when I was a kid and never brushed quite as much as I should have. I guess I thought my teeth would last forever. (Narrator: They don’t.) So over the years I had fillings where I had munched on Gobstoppers, Skittles, Shock Tarts, M&Ms, Laffy Taffy, and Now and Laters a little too enthusiastically. Then those fillings cracked and I had them replaced. Finally, this past summer, one of those fillings reached the end of the road, and a crown was necessary.

Crowning achievement

You might not believe me when I tell you I was excited to get that crown done, but I was. I had a crown done by the same dentist for the same reasons a few years earlier, and it went great. He numbed my mouth, went to work, and I left with a beautiful white tooth a few hours later.

The same thing happened this past summer. He numbed me, drilled out the remainder of the filling, had the crown made in their on-site lab, and then fastened it on top before sending me on my way with another beautiful tooth.

Lying there with my mouth open, with vibrating drills rattling my teeth, I thought about how amazing the technology is that makes this kind of operation possible and painless. The assistant used some sort of laser technology to scan my mouth after everything was cleared out, and the crown was finished less than 90 minutes later.

Imagine telling our ancestors that.

I shudder to think about what it was like sitting with a toothache 200 years ago. I don’t need a degree in dental history to imagine it was rather unpleasant, to put it mildly. And so, as much as I naturally want to hate the dentist and his menacing tools, the more I think about the world before the modern DDS, the more I realize I quite like him in 2026.

RELATED: The future belongs to people who believe in one

Cheng Xin/Getty Images

Drill, baby, drill

In the middle of the procedure this past summer, as my tooth was being hollowed out with vibrating steel, my dentist said he loves doing this kind of work the most. As a naturally inquisitive person, I asked him why.

He told me he loves the transformation. He loves carving out all the decay and old filling and making it better than it was before. It was the most excited I’ve ever seen him.

Being at the dentist is an intimate experience. We lie there and let a couple of people we don’t know very well hunch over us and get really close to our faces while they dig around in our mouths, and we are helpless the entire time. It can be kind of embarrassing.

“Oh God, they are looking in my mouth with magnifying glasses. Did I brush enough this morning?”

In some way, needing a crown feels like a failure. I didn’t brush well enough, and now I need my tooth fixed. It’s almost like you want to apologize to the dentist.

But hearing my dentist talk about how much he loves doing this kind of work was enlightening. It humanized the man behind the mask.

He’s not a psychopath, despite his love for drilling into teeth all day long. There’s a beating heart inside the DDS. He wants to help. It took me a long time to realize it, but I think I might like the dentist more than any other doctor I see.

Sure, he bears bad news. But he can fix almost all of the problems he diagnoses. That’s more than most doctors can say.

Thirteen-year-old me wouldn’t believe it, but 39-year-old me actually likes the dentist.

​Men’s style, Lifestyle, Health, Dentist, Crowns, The root of the matter 

Donald Trump is considering a small handful of candidates for “AI czar” — notionally, a Cabinet-level role overseeing the industry, the technology, and something the president is calling, perhaps in the spirit of Space Force, the “AI Force.”

Trump has not specified much beyond that. Nobody rumored to be under consideration seems especially eager for the job.

Perhaps we don’t need someone with the power of a czar to rule AI. Perhaps we need someone with the authority of a saint to counsel us about it.

Plenty of reasons suggest themselves.

Not quite everything is computer. Many crucial components of America’s good working order still require special and undivided attention of their own. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is no longer being considered because of the importance of his current role. The logic is arguably the same for White House science and technology adviser Michael Kratsios and other potential candidates.

And, as the untimely demise of Czar Nicholas II and his family at the hands of the communists reminds us, a czar invested with enough power and authority can swiftly become a scapegoat or blood sacrifice of the highest order.

Which brings us to the momentous possibilities unsealed simply by creating a high office called AI czar.

Polls show most Americans think democracy is doing poorly. For a growing share across the political spectrum, that is not necessarily a bad thing.

Two in three respondents say a democratically elected government is highly important to our national identity, a staggering drop from 80% just five years ago. Just shy of half of Americans under 30 say democracy is either not that important to our national identity or not important at all.

Many Americans, of course, remain firmly committed to democracy. That includes plenty who regard it, in Churchill’s famous formulation, as the worst form of government except for all the others.

Abandoning it would also appear to require scrapping the Constitution and repudiating the Declaration of Independence.

However far we have strayed in 250 years from those founding documents, the right to vote and the core freedoms protected by the Bill of Rights still command strong majority support. Plenty of younger Americans are open to rewriting the Constitution, but a national convention for that purpose remains broadly unpopular.

RELATED: ‘Don’t be evil’ may be dead, but ‘don’t be Frankenstein’ is alive

Bay Area News Group/Tribune News Service/Getty Images

Then comes the practical problem: Americans cannot remotely agree on who ought to rule them, much less what a formally post-democratic America should look like.

Many people ready to walk away from democracy, or convinced that it is unsalvageable, stop short of demanding regime change when they contemplate the obvious alternative: another, still more horrible civil war.

Now add AI.

Its arrival and incorporation into the highest levels of government under a czar of its own throw our fundamental regime questions into unusually sharp relief.

Many Americans feel viscerally that AI is moving too fast. Many also regard the staggering decline and decay of the past decade-plus as an unacceptable alternative to moving fast.

Yet the people trying to pump the brakes or reverse course command nothing like a popular majority.

Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) have proposed banning artificial superintelligence, pausing some advanced AI development until a new federal regulator writes safety rules, and imposing penalties of up to 20 years in prison for certain violations.

Whatever one thinks of the underlying risks, that approach is likely to feed a post-democratic counterreaction against efforts to place technological development under increasingly centralized political control.

Meanwhile, much of the AI-safety world gives normal Americans the ick for reasons of its own: the prevalence of nerd-orgy ethics, for one, and the baffling insistence in some quarters that rational thought requires assigning the existence of future shrimp, bugs, or cyborgs moral weight comparable to — or greater than — your own life and the lives of everyone now drawing breath.

For reasons like these, some on the right daydream about an actual Caesar who could, as a last resort, clean America’s house and put it back into fighting trim.

Others imagine something less deliberate: The system collapses under the weight of its dysfunction, a process of elimination begins, and a Caesar-ish figure emerges from the gong show to take control at a stroke.

That “-ish” is important.

RELATED: Now they’re saying the AIs built ‘secret civilizations’ — the truth is far worse

Fine Art Images/Heritage Images/Getty Images

Our circumstances and our talent pool differ so radically from those of the late Roman Republic that betting everything on the miraculous appearance of a Julius or Augustus seems far-fetched.

Even grown in a lab, Czarborg would be only a simulation of the genuine article — more Frankenstein than Constantine.

Speaking of Constantine, the record of Roman caesars, Russian czars, and German kaisers should cure anyone of the idea that concentrated power reliably produces competent or benevolent rule. Plenty of mighty rulers did far more damage to their countries and their people than good.

But Constantine, like Nicholas II, also points toward another category entirely: Caesars and czars can become saints.

Some will object that sainthood is itself a dubious title, especially when bestowed on rulers.

The more interesting difficulty is that genuinely saintly rulers, like genuinely saintly people, are not measured by their ability to deliver merely mortal justice or merely worldly happiness.

Divine justice and divine happiness are different things. Christ’s reception and punishment in Jerusalem should permanently unsettle anyone looking to godly leaders for uncomplicated worldly deliverance.

Which leaves us with the most counterintuitive possibility raised by something as powerful as AI.

Perhaps we do not need someone with the power of a czar to rule it. Perhaps we need someone with the authority of a saint to counsel us about it.

​Ai czar, Ai force, Artificial superintelligence, Bernie sanders, Caesar, Constitution, Democracy, Donald trump, Greg casar, Opinion & analysis, Technology 

Los Angeles voters appear ready to fire Mayor Karen Bass (D). They just aren’t replacing her with Spencer Pratt. That’s California for you!

A new UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll for the Los Angeles Times has City Councilwoman Nithya Raman (D, DSA) leading Bass 39% to 28%, with fully one-third of likely voters still undecided.

California is not secretly conservative. Los Angeles is not secretly Republican. And voters who reject Karen Bass are under no obligation to replace her with someone to her right.

The mayor’s numbers are dreadful. Nearly two-thirds of likely voters view her unfavorably. Bass has spent much of the year absorbing blame for homelessness, housing costs, and her response to the Palisades fire.

So much for the idea that Los Angeles voters are content with failure. They aren’t. They may simply have a very different idea of what should come next.

Raman is not offering Los Angeles a conservative correction. Far from it. She comes from the activist left and has the backing of the Democratic Socialists of America. She polls especially well among younger voters.

Bass has a strong left-wing pedigree of her own, but she has been around long enough to become establishment: Sacramento, Congress, City Hall.

Raman represents something newer.

A Democrat electorate can decide that a Democrat mayor has failed without becoming Republican. This should not be difficult to understand. Somehow, it remains difficult.

I have been making versions of this argument for a long time.

In 2014, after another statewide Republican drubbing, I wrote a column for the Sacramento Bee asking, “Hypothetically Speaking, How Can California Republicans Win Again?” (Sadly, not online — turns out the internet is not forever.)

My answer was not: Move left. My answer was: Move.

Move into neighborhoods. Into schools. Into communities Republicans had largely stopped contesting. Talk to voters in English and Spanish. Focus on local problems.

“For a minority party to become a majority,” I wrote then, “it cannot merely oppose. It must propose.”

I also warned against fatalism.

RELATED: Iowa is flashing a giant red warning light for November

Lurii Garmash/Getty Images

Of course Republicans were out-funded and out-organized. Of course much of the press disliked them. So what?

Two years later, after Donald Trump won the presidency while California voted overwhelmingly for Hillary Clinton, I wrote another column called “Take California, Please.”

California had just legalized recreational marijuana, elected Kamala Harris to the Senate, extended high income-tax rates, tightened gun laws, raised cigarette taxes, and approved more borrowing.

In short, California voted like California. It still does.

Today, Democrats constitute nearly 45% of California’s registered voters. Republicans are just under 25%. No Party Preference voters make up nearly 23%.

Los Angeles is cerulean blue.

Even Richard Riordan, the lone Republican mayor during the city’s long Democrat era, was no conservative in the contemporary sense. The dude was a Catholic who called himself “pro-choice.” Come on.

The mystery is not why Democrats keep winning. The mystery is why conservatives keep acting surprised.

Spencer Pratt, to his credit, seems to understand part of this better than some of his loudest supporters. After losing the June primary, Pratt recently told followers that Los Angeles “had its chance for a candidate of change.”

Then he blamed them.

“A lot of you just stayed home,” Pratt wrote. Others voted for another candidate. “I told you to get ten of your friends to vote, and you didn’t do it.”

Notice what he did not say. He did not say the election was stolen.

Some of his supporters have been happy to say that for him. Pratt’s explanation was less comforting: His supporters did not turn out enough voters.

Now 63% of Pratt’s June voters remain undecided between Bass and Raman.

The revolt against Bass is real. It is not a conservative revolt.

RELATED: The socialists want a new Constitution. Believe them.

Selcuk Acar/Anadolu/Getty Images

Pratt has another message for Californians: “Vote for governor, you still have a shot.” Yes, but it’s a long one.

Karen Bass has a rather different view.

In a recent interview, Bass declared the race effectively finished. “Our governor’s name is Xavier Becerra,” she said. “You don’t need an election on November 3. A Republican cannot win in this state.”

The gall of the woman! Of course California needs an election.

But forget the swagger for a moment and look at the arithmetic behind it. The latest PPIC poll has Becerra leading Republican Steve Hilton 60% to 38% among likely voters.

Those numbers should look familiar. Gavin Newsom beat Republican John Cox by nearly 24 points in 2018. Four years later, Newsom beat Brian Dahle by more than 18.

Those elections did not require cheating. Those are landslides.

I don’t like that any more than most Blaze News readers do. But I am not going to tell you California is secretly Republican because I wish it were. It isn’t.

California is a mostly blue state with vast swaths of red and millions of conservative residents.

Pratt’s response to Bass was revealing in another way. One-party dominance, he argued, teaches politicians that they do not have to earn votes. Give them a loss occasionally, he said, and perhaps they will try harder next time.

There is an old political truth in there. Competition disciplines parties. Long periods of dominance can breed complacency.

But California conservatives have their own problem. Sorry, friends. We are a despised minority.

Democrats have spent decades cultivating unions, ethnic communities, neighborhood groups, renters, homeowners, public employees, donors, activists, and candidates. The democratic socialist left understands this perfectly well. The DSA does not merely post about Nithya Raman. Its volunteers knock on doors.

Online enthusiasm is something else. X is not a precinct operation. A viral post is not a voter file. Ten thousand furious replies are not 10,000 ballots. As Spencer Pratt learned the hard way.

The work of politics isn’t easy. It’s tedious. It’s local. It requires endless hours nobody applauds and conversations with people who may dislike you before you open your mouth.

California is not secretly conservative. Los Angeles is not secretly Republican. And voters who reject Karen Bass are under no obligation to replace her with someone to her right.

You are not required to like California as it is. I sure don’t.

But before anyone can explain its politics, much less change them, there is one unavoidable requirement: See the place clearly.

​Activists, California, California politics, Competition, Democratic socialists, Democrats, Donors, Gavin newsom, Homeowners, Housing costs, Karen bass, Los angeles, Nithya raman, Palisades fire, Republicans, Spencer pratt, Dsa, Opinion & analysis 

In a day where TikTok theology is wracking up millions of views, it’s more important than ever for Christians to know what the Bible actually says.

On this episode of “Live Free,” Josh Howerton’s co-hosts and fellow pastors Paul Cunningham and Carlos Erazo address a viral TikTok video, in which the creator claims the Bible has several contradictions.

“The Bible says that God is all-knowing. Psalm 147:5 says that His understanding is infinite. First John 3:20 says that God knows all things. Matthew 10:30 says that He knows the number of hairs on our heads,” the video creator began.

“But in Genesis 18, God says He’s going to go down to the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to know how sinful they’re being. An all-knowing God would know that. He wouldn’t have to go down there. Also, an all-present God would already be there,” he argued.

In his second claim, he argued that the empty story was inconsistent across the gospels: “In the books of Matthew and Luke in the Resurrection story, it says that the women who discovered the empty tomb ran off and told everyone that the tomb was empty. But in the book of Mark, it says that the women were afraid and didn’t tell anyone.”

The creator’s final claim aimed to debunk the Bible’s definition of love: “And then of course there’s the whole God is love, but then it also says that love is patient and kind, never jealous or boast. But then it says that God is a jealous God. So how could God be love if love isn’t jealous?”

Cunningham begins by addressing the TikTok creator’s claim about love and jealousy, pointing to the semantics of the word “jealous.”

“The same word can be used in certain ways in certain contexts that would be appropriate and in other ways that would be inappropriate,” he says.

He gives the example of a husband being jealous regarding his wife. “I should not be jealous if my wife were simply to say hello to a male co-worker, but I actually should be jealous if my wife slept with that male co-worker,” he explains.

“The reason I give that analogy is that usually when it says God is jealous in the Bible, it’s in relationship to His people, Israel, and it talks about in context that they are His bride and they are giving love to a different god or a different thing that only belongs to Him,” he adds.

Erazo then dives into the creator’s claim that an all-knowing God would not have to visit Sodom and Gomorrah to find out what the people were up to.

He gives the analogy of playing hide-and-seek with his 4-year-old son. “I’ll say, ‘Where are you? I don’t see you.’ I know where he is because I’m his father,” he says. “And so when God seems to be asking questions and when He seems to not know one thing, He knows.”

“A fancy phrase for that is called anthropomorphic language,” adds Cunningham. “God has to use language we can understand to help us understand a God we can’t completely understand.”

Above all, Cunningham and Erazo want believers to not allow “seeming contradictions” to shake their faith.

“When you see videos like this, don’t freak out if they bring up something you’ve never thought about because someone else has thought about it and probably given a really good answer for it,” says Cunningham.

To hear the duo’s full response to the video and other kinds of TikTok theology, watch the episode above.

Join BlazeTV+ and start watching Josh today at blazetv.com/JOSH. Use promo code JOSH to get $20 off your subscription.

​Josh howerton, Tiktok, Theology, Blazetv show 

Actress Tatiana Maslany recently called Tom Selleck and Michael Jordan “cowardly” for keeping politics out of much of their work.

Some readers may ask: Who?

If all art is political, as Maslany says, then let the art speak. Give us a performance powerful enough to make us listen.

Maslany won an Emmy for “Orphan Black” and starred in Marvel’s “She-Hulk: Attorney at Law.” That is a career many actors would envy. Selleck and Jordan, however, are household names whose audiences have stayed with them for decades.

I wonder whether Maslany has thought much about why.

On Mehdi Hasan’s show, Maslany argued that all entertainment is political. Selleck had explained that he saw little sense in alienating half the country when his job was to entertain it. Jordan’s famous line about Republicans buying sneakers made much the same point. Maslany called that kind of restraint cowardly.

Fame and money can make anyone feel invulnerable. At the height of their fame, Selleck and Jordan could have told audiences what to think at every opportunity. Instead, they showed enough judgment to consider what they might lose by doing so — and whether politics was necessary to the work in the first place.

They built careers that lasted longer than the moment when everybody wanted an autograph.

I have seen this kind of signaling on a much smaller and more personal level. At one teaching hospital where my wife received extensive treatment, some young residents wore pronouns on their badges. None of the attending surgeons who treated Gracie did. I could choose the attending surgeon; the residents came with the package.

Let me be blunt. If you make pronouns part of your professional presentation, I notice. To me, putting them front and center signals concerns I do not want inserted into a relationship built on competence and trust. I could not choose the residents assigned to Gracie’s care. When the choice is mine, however, I make it.

Were the attending surgeons cowards for leaving pronouns off their badges? I have no idea what each of them believed. I know that when Gracie faced another surgery, their personal lives and politics never entered the room or gave me reason to question their judgment.

That becomes rather important when you are standing at an operating room door.

RELATED: The fourth bus of the Apocalypse

Cem Genco/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

An entertainer’s public choices work much the same way. Maslany can impugn Selleck and Jordan. She can say whatever she pleases. And I can decline to spend a dime or a minute on her work.

I cannot watch a Robert De Niro movie now without hearing his political rants instead of his character. When football players began kneeling during the national anthem, I stopped watching. Nearly a decade later, I still have not returned. The NFL went on without me, and I went on without it.

Gillette lost me the same way. When the company aired its commercial about “toxic masculinity,” I stopped buying its products. I never announced a boycott. I simply bought another razor. My eyebrows went up when I later heard Dana Perino say on “The Five” that her husband, Peter, had done the same.

How many other customers quietly made that decision?

Nobody has to organize a boycott. People can simply find another razor, another movie, or something else to do on Sunday afternoon. The business may never learn why the customer disappeared.

RELATED: What Montana taught this Southern storyteller about shutting up

Karla Ann Cote/NurPhoto/Getty Images

Maslany recently turned 41. She is no newcomer waiting for her first break. She knows how much talent and luck it takes to land a role people remember, and she cannot know how many more will come.

Perhaps she will gain admirers for what she said. Perhaps she will never miss a role or a paycheck. Or perhaps some people she hopes will watch her next performance will quietly walk away. Others whose livelihoods depend on her work may absorb some of the cost.

That is the part of celebrity political speech people often miss. The audience does not owe the performer its continued attention.

If all art is political, as Maslany says, then let the art speak. Give us a performance powerful enough to make us listen. Calling two men cowards is easier than producing work people will still want to see decades from now.

Selleck and Jordan understood something about fame while they had plenty of it: An audience does not belong to you.

Maslany is free to speak her mind. The rest of us are just as free to decide whether we want to hear any more.

​Entertainment industry, Michael jordan, Freedom of speech, Hollywood, Tatiana maslany, She-hulk, Tom selleck, Robert de niro, Boycotts, Actors, Audiences, Opinion & analysis 

During a discussion of the controversial Lindsay Clancy case, “The View” co-host Sunny Hostin made a terrifying admission.

Not only did Hostin recount serving on the 1991 jury that found a man not criminally responsible by reason of insanity after he killed, dismembered, and cooked a woman — she claimed she was the reason he got off.

“I cannot believe that she thought it would be a good idea to admit this in public on her show that is national,” BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales comments, before playing the clip of Hostin.

“The reason I feel so strongly about this holdout juror is because I was a holdout juror in a case, in the Daniel Rakowitz case. I don’t know if people remember it,” Hostin began.

“Apparently several jurors questioned afterwards said one holdout juror was principally responsible for preventing them from returning a guilty verdict. That was me. And it was because I saw clearly that he was psychotic,” she continued.

“He was in a psychosis. He did not mean to kill her. And once he killed her, he panicked. He chopped up her body parts. Yes, boiled her body parts. Tried to commit the perfect crime,” she added.

“You got this guy off?” co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin asked, shocked.

“That’s how much I believe in the insanity defense,” Hostin replied, adding, “And he fed her body parts to the unhoused.”

“One juror threw a chair at me. They were so angry with me. But one by one, I picked them off and said, ‘What about this? What about that?’ And we ended up … unanimously voting that he was not criminally responsible by reason of insanity,” she added.

“That’s because they just wanted to go home,” Gonzales comments. “That’s because they couldn’t stand being in the same room with you anymore.”

“Let’s just be clear here. Sunny Hostin bullied an entire jury into siding with a murderer who killed and ate someone,” she adds.

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

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

​Lindsay clancy, Sunny hostin, Daniel rakowitz, The view, Sara gonzales, Blazetv show 

Massachusetts, birthplace of the American Revolution, is considering a new experiment in identity politics. Companion bills in the Massachusetts House and Senate — H.3351 and S.2134 — would establish a permanent commission dedicated to the interests of Muslims in the state. Among its duties would be to “identify and recommend qualified American Muslims for appointive positions at all levels of government, including boards and commissions.” Muslims make up a small percentage of the state’s population of roughly 7 million.

The legislation suits Massachusetts’ identity-politics obsession. It slides effortlessly alongside previous steps to protect the rights of Jews, gays, Asians, and blacks. Except now, lawmakers are proposing to put the state’s imprimatur on one of the world’s most rapacious and cruel belief systems.

The history of Muslim-majority societies offers ample material for examining the relationship among Islam, religious freedom, political authority, and the treatment of minorities.

The proposal should alarm Americans even more than the election of Zohran Mamdani or the proposed development of the Meadow, a mosque-centered, all-Muslim enclave in allegedly red Texas.

Block and tackle

On August 11, former Auburn football coach Tommy Tuberville, a sitting U.S. senator and Republican candidate for governor of Alabama, clapped back at the Massachusetts proposal. He posted on X that no such legislation would ever emerge on his watch in the Yellowhammer State.

Coach Tuberville should do more than post platitudes. If elected, he should seek legislation making Alabama the first state in the nation to formally declare Islamic teaching inimical to the history and tradition of Alabamans and force a constitutional debate over how far a state may go in protecting its religious heritage. And he should be willing to block and tackle for this policy all the way to the Supreme Court.

The Declaration of Independence does not define religious belief alongside its four mentions of a Creator. The Constitution likewise offers no comprehensive definition of religion. American courts have generally avoided establishing a single definition that would determine which faiths count as religions and which do not.

The “history and tradition” approach used by the Supreme Court in other constitutional contexts — most famously in Justice Antonin Scalia’s majority opinion on gun rights in Heller (2008) — offers Tuberville a provocative model for the argument we propose. Heller did not concern religious liberty, and its test does not govern the First Amendment’s religion clauses. But history and tradition are hardly irrelevant to constitutional interpretation.

The Alabama way

And the history and tradition of America is deeply Christian. More directly, much of it is Protestant Christian. That is especially true in Alabama, which became a state in 1819 after settlement largely by migrants from other Southern states who brought with them overwhelmingly Protestant religious traditions. Earlier Spanish and French settlement left a Catholic inheritance, particularly around Mobile.

Recent Alabama history gives Tuberville two bright lights to follow. The first is former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore. Moore was removed from office in 2003 after refusing a federal court order to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the state judicial building. He was suspended from judicial office again in 2016 over an order concerning same-sex marriage after the Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision. The latter position, by the way, was broadly consistent with the view Barack Obama publicly professed before 2012. As the nation’s biblical foundation crumbles, courts are reconsidering some disputes over Ten Commandments displays, while polling suggests support for some gay-rights positions has plateaued or declined from its peak. Whatever one thinks of Moore himself, arguments once treated as beyond the pale have not disappeared.

The second beacon is Hoover, Alabama, where the Planning and Zoning Commission last December unanimously recommended denial of a rezoning request that would have allowed the Islamic Academy of Alabama and a Muslim prayer center to relocate to Meadowbrook Corporate Park. City planning staff cited concerns including compatibility with the comprehensive plan, traffic, and occupancy projections. The academy subsequently withdrew its application before the Hoover City Council could make the final decision.

The issue should resonate with Tuberville because his erstwhile hometown, Auburn, will soon face its own debate. Tuberville should make clear what role, if any, he believes the state should play when Alabama localities confront such controversies.

Coach Tuberville’s playbook

In Montgomery, Tuberville could begin by forcing a debate over a history lesson the late Charlie Kirk gave in 2024: America’s founding political culture was overwhelmingly Christian and, more particularly, Protestant. Religious tests existed in a number of states during the founding era. Charles Carroll of Maryland was the only Catholic signer of the Declaration of Independence; Daniel Carroll of Maryland and Thomas Fitzsimons of Pennsylvania were the only Catholic signers of the Constitution.

Second, Tuberville and his legal team should explicitly ask a question existing constitutional law does not answer in the way we would like: How much authority does a state retain to defend its particular religious and cultural inheritance against an ideology it regards as hostile to that inheritance?

Current First Amendment doctrine places formidable limits on what Alabama could do. That is precisely why such legislation would constitute a constitutional challenge rather than an ordinary exercise of existing state authority. The bill could state Alabama’s historical relationship with Christianity and argue that the people of Alabama possess a legitimate interest in preserving that inheritance. Doing so would provoke a major confrontation over the First, 10th, and 14th Amendments and the Supremacy Clause — and force Americans to debate whether existing constitutional doctrine adequately equips states facing potentially existential cultural change.

Third, Alabama could explore the constitutional limits of legislation preventing state courts from substituting foreign or religious law for state and federal law. Any such statute would have to be carefully written: Religious principles can arise in contracts, wills, arbitration, and other private arrangements protected by existing law. The objective should be to establish unequivocally that Alabama courts are governed by Alabama and federal law, not to pretend that current First Amendment doctrine permits the state simply to outlaw references to Sharia.

Finally, Alabama should require serious academic instruction in the Bible’s influence on Western civilization and American history in its public schools, consistent with constitutional limits on devotional instruction. The state cannot do better than to examine the curriculum developed by Hillsdale College.

RELATED: ‘I think they’re demons’: Why JD Vance refuses to downplay supernatural evil

Silver Screen Collection/Kent Nishimura-Pool/Getty Images

Verse of the sword

The larger argument concerns Islam itself. Islamic scripture and jurisprudence contain teachings concerning nonbelievers, warfare, conversion, tribute, and political authority that deserve far more scrutiny than contemporary American discourse generally gives them.

Quran 9:5 and 9:29 are among the passages at the center of centuries of argument over jihad and the treatment of non-Muslims. Islamic scholars themselves have long debated naskh, or abrogation — the doctrine that some Quranic revelations supersede others — including the relationship between earlier passages associated with Muhammad’s period in Mecca and later revelations from Medina.

Muslims disagree sharply about what those passages require today. That disagreement should be acknowledged rather than used as an excuse not to examine the texts at all.

What Alabama cannot plausibly do under existing First Amendment law is simply declare Islam “fighting words” and suppress it on that basis. The Supreme Court’s fighting-words doctrine is far narrower than that. But Tuberville could force the more difficult political and constitutional question underneath the phrase: What happens when Americans believe a religious ideology contains not merely private theological claims but a political program fundamentally at odds with the constitutional order?

That is the debate Alabama should provoke.

From X to executive

The history of Muslim-majority societies offers ample material for examining the relationship among Islam, religious freedom, political authority, and the treatment of minorities. Tuberville need not pretend that current constitutional doctrine already gives him the answer. His opportunity would be to ask the question aggressively enough that courts, lawmakers, and voters have to confront it.

Tuberville’s response to Massachusetts was what you do on X. But it was a quip for no gain compared with what a laser-focused, fearless, conservative Christian governor could attempt in office. In Matthew 21:42, Jesus quotes Psalm 118:22 and affirms that He is the cornerstone of the faith.

Make Alabama the cornerstone of America’s anti-caliphate wall.

How Governor Tuberville acts, if voters give him the job, will reveal whether the SEC’s famed Riverboat Gambler has the team and the guts to play smash-mouth legal football.

​Tommy tuberville, Islam, Caliphate, Alabama, Christianity, Jihad, Identity politics, Law, Faith, Massachusetts 

When the United States military disables ad trackers on troop smartphones because Iranian agents might use them to inflict harm, you know a technology has outgrown its original sales pitch.

The same surveillance system tracking American soldiers is tracking ordinary Americans too. The difference is that the military has finally decided that it’s too dangerous to ignore.

Stopping the insanity requires cutting off the flow at its source.

An ad tracker is a small piece of software code placed inside apps, websites, and operating systems. Its official job is simple. It monitors what you click and what you buy. It tracks where you scroll so companies can serve you personalized ads for running shoes, air fryers, lawnmowers — or just about anything else you might buy. To make this work, your phone generates a unique string of numbers called a Mobile Advertising ID. Think of it as a digital name tag stuck to your lapel. Every time you check the weather or browse a dating app, your phone broadcasts this ID along with your location, network data, and browsing habits to hundreds of middleman companies in milliseconds.

This brings us to the absurd reality of the modern web. You are forking out hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of dollars for a handheld surveillance device that sells your habits to anyone with a corporate credit card.

Horror stories

The immediate danger for most people is financial exploitation. In 2024, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services received tens of thousands of complaints from Americans who clicked social media ads offering $6,400 gift cards for groceries, only to find their actual health insurance plans canceled or swapped without their consent. Everyday shoppers thought they were signing up for relief money. Instead, aggressive lead-generation companies took their data and enrolled them in alternative plans to collect broker commissions. People showed up to pharmacies only to discover their life-saving insulin was no longer covered because an algorithm flagged them as easy targets for a predatory Facebook ad.

Medical privacy vanishes just as quickly. Consider the Meta Pixel, a piece of tracking code embedded directly into hospital websites and patient portals. Novant Health and Duly Health and Care both faced major legal actions after tracking pixels on their patient platforms routed sensitive personal health data directly to social media servers. Duly Health settled its lawsuit for $1.88 million after allegations that the code transmitted details about patient appointments, diagnoses, and treatments to advertising networks. If you look up an uncommon medical condition on a hospital portal, your phone’s advertising ID instantly links that health status to your social profile, resulting in targeted ads for treatments popping up alongside photos of your nephew’s birthday party.

RELATED: In this big Texas city, garbage trucks have joined the surveillance state

shaunl/Getty Images

The system tracks physical locations just as efficiently as web traffic. Federal Trade Commission enforcement actions against data brokers like Gravy Analytics and Mobilewalla revealed a rather robust market for precise geographical data harvested directly from cell phones. Commercial tools like Babel Street’s Locate X take these mobile advertising IDs and map them onto real-world coordinates. In one documented test, investigators used commercial advertising records to trace an individual device from a private residence in Alabama to a local hardware store, a church, and finally an abortion clinic in Florida. In modern-day America, you don’t need a warrant, a badge, or a court order to track someone across state lines. With an ad-tech subscription and a corporate login, you’re good to go.

How to take back your privacy

Every American with a smartphone should care. The reason is straightforward. By default, they’re enrolled in a passive location-tracking network. Apps like MyFitnessPal, Tinder, and run-of-the-mill mobile games collect spatial coordinates and transmit them into open ad auctions billions of times every day. That data is aggregated and packaged, then sold to third parties who build permanent location profiles on millions of citizens. Your phone tracks each visit to a counselor, a house of worship, a divorce lawyer, or a hospital, turning your daily routines and commutes into an open book for commercial entities.

Stopping the insanity requires cutting off the flow at its source.

On iPhone, open Settings, go to Privacy & Security, select Tracking, and toggle off Allow Apps to Request to Track. Then go to Apple Advertising at the bottom of the Privacy menu and disable Personalized Ads.

On Android, open Settings, select Privacy, tap Ads, and choose Delete advertising ID. Deleting this ID wipes your existing profile tag and forces apps to stop sharing your location with advertising brokers.

The steps are simple, but the principle is even simpler. If the Pentagon doesn’t trust strangers to know where its people are, you probably shouldn’t want strangers knowing where you are either.

​Tech, Smartphone, Security, Privacy, Ad tracker 

Remember when the gasoline engine was living on borrowed time?

Automakers were announcing ambitious electric-vehicle plans, governments were setting targets and deadlines, and consumers were repeatedly told that the future of the automobile had already been decided. The only real question seemed to be how quickly we would get there.

Gasoline vehicles weren’t merely going to lose market share. At some brands, they were supposed to disappear.

Cadillac was among the most aggressive. The company said it planned to become an all-electric brand by the end of this decade. Its own website still declares that every new Cadillac model introduced in the United States by the end of the decade will be electric.

Something interesting happened on the way to that all-electric future: People kept buying gasoline-powered cars.

So many, in fact, that Cadillac is preparing a whole new generation of them.

Revving up

GM CEO Mary Barra confirmed this summer that Cadillac’s next generation of internal-combustion vehicles will begin arriving in 2027. The lineup is expected to include a new CT5 sedan and new versions of the XT5 and XT6 crossovers. The XT6 is particularly interesting because Cadillac discontinued it after the 2025 model year. Now it’s coming back with a gasoline engine.

The XT5 got a reprieve too. Cadillac had been expected to kill the gasoline-powered crossover but instead extended production of the current model and approved a new generation for the U.S. market. Cadillac said it was making “necessary adjustments” to its portfolio to meet customer demand.

There’s that word again: demand.

Because while automakers have been adjusting their product plans, American EV sales have been sending a message of their own.

Money talks

Look at August. Despite a record increase in hybrid sales, Kia sold just 712 EV6s, down 60% from August 2025. Hyundai sold 28 Ioniq 6 sedans — yes, 28 — a 97% decline. Its much more popular Ioniq 5 fell 51%.

Ford’s numbers were even more dramatic. Mustang Mach-E sales fell 72.5% to 1,989 vehicles. Ford sold only 148 F-150 Lightnings, down 95% from the same month last year.

Honda sold 1,788 Prologues, down about 81% from August 2025. Honda has already confirmed that Prologue production will end after the 2026 model year.

Subaru’s Solterra dropped almost 87%, although that one comes with a major caveat: Subaru’s newer Trailseeker and Uncharted EVs helped push the company’s total EV sales up for the month, and limited Solterra inventory may have contributed to its collapse.

That’s why I wouldn’t judge the EV market by one model or even one month’s sales. Some of these vehicles are being discontinued. Others are being replaced. And August 2025 is an unusually difficult comparison because buyers were rushing to take advantage of the federal EV tax credit before it disappeared.

Market correction

But zoom out and the picture is still striking. According to the National Automobile Dealers Association, battery-electric vehicles accounted for 10.1% of new-vehicle sales in August 2025. One year later, their share had fallen to 6.2%. Overall new-vehicle sales weren’t collapsing either. August sales were actually up 1.5% from the previous year on a seasonally adjusted annualized basis.

So Americans didn’t suddenly stop buying cars. They became less interested in buying EVs.

That doesn’t mean the electric car is dead. Far from it. Cadillac currently offers five EVs, and manufacturers continue to spend billions developing electric vehicles. Some individual EVs are selling well, and Subaru’s August numbers show exactly why you have to be careful about declaring an entire technology a failure because one nameplate plunges.

But that’s very different from what consumers were being told just a few years ago.

The industry’s transition to EVs was often presented as inevitable and, more importantly, imminent. Gasoline vehicles weren’t merely going to lose market share. At some brands, they were supposed to disappear.

RELATED: Is charging your EV really cheaper than buying gas?

Bloomberg/Getty Images

Sales force

Cadillac is a wonderful example. It didn’t merely say it wanted to sell more EVs. It said it planned to be all-electric by the end of the decade. Now the company is developing another generation of gasoline-powered Cadillacs that will arrive with only a few years left on that clock.

Why? Because car companies eventually have to sell cars.

Consumers don’t buy corporate transition plans. They buy vehicles that fit their lives, budgets, and driving habits. For some people, that’s an EV. For others, it’s a hybrid. And plenty still want an ordinary gasoline-powered car or truck. Manufacturers are finally acknowledging that reality.

I don’t have a problem with electric vehicles. Build good ones. Make them affordable. Improve the charging network. Give consumers enough range and enough choices, and let them decide whether an EV works for them.

What I object to is deciding the answer first and expecting the customer to fall in line afterward. The auto industry spent years telling us where the market was going. Now the market is talking back. And judging by the gasoline-powered Cadillacs headed our way, somebody in Detroit is finally listening.

​Auto industry, Electric car, Electric vehicles, Ev market, Gasoline engine, Ev tax credit, Cadillac, Mary barra, Hyundai, Kia, Ford, Lifestyle, Automotive 

Men have always found reasons to avoid difficult fights — but today this has gotten worse, and it’s not exactly their fault.

The biggest problem with men these days, Todd Erzen of the “Steve Deace Show” explains, is that “they keep finding reasons not to fight in a culture where there are fights everywhere.”

“You’re not supposed to just randomly do it because it’s your style, your thing. You’re supposed to do it because the Lord identifies good and evil, and you are a servant of the good,” he continues.

“You must, as a man, vanquish evil,” he adds.

However, BlazeTV host Steve Deace points out that even in Genesis 3, “There’s not a whole bunch of guys preemptively looking to take on evil.”

“The opposite is often true. We wait until we’re cornered. We wait until we’ve suffered enough,” he explains.

“So that’s not new. That’s not unique,” he adds.

And even the founding fathers were not prepared to attack the “first time their God-given rights were violated.”

“They spent 10 years thinking about it, talking about it, negotiating it. Then when the redcoats start putting armed soldiers in their homes and calling it the ‘Quartering Act,’ they’re like, ‘You know, guys, we might be at a point of no return here,’” Deace says.

“I promise you, we’re not the first generation of men late to the party. That’s been every generation of men. Every single one,” he continues.

“We’re sinners,” he adds.

What is new, however, Deace explains, are the phones that never leave our hands.

“It’s these phones. We have never had at our instant disposal more opportunities to dissuade us from our priorities than the current technology of this world provides,” he says, adding, “Now that is what is new.”

Want more from Steve Deace?

To enjoy more of Steve’s take on national politics, Christian worldview, and principled conservatism with a snarky twist, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Founding fathers, Steve deace, Men, Good, Evil, Genesis, Todd erzen, Technology, Blazetv show 

Philip Anthony Mitchell — founder and lead pastor of Atlanta’s 2819 Church — catches flak for speaking out about the dangers of radical Islam, but he does it boldly anyway.

The ideology, he told BlazeTV host and Lakepointe Church pastor Josh Howerton on a recent episode of “Live Free,” is “incompatible” with both Christianity and Western fundamentals — and yet it continues to be embraced in American cities and legislatures in the name of “inclusion.”

But if the church doesn’t contend, our “children and grandchildren” will suffer greatly under the “antichrist monotheism” that is Islam, Mitchell warns.

To crystallize the gravity of that threat, he offered a harrowing analogy pulled from his days as a college student.

“When I was in college … my roommates and I, we had pet snakes,” says Mitchell.

“This one first python we had … she only ate rats … and I remember we would toss the rat in the cage. That python, Josh, would sit in the corner of the cage in the darkness, and that rat would just run around the cage,” he recounts.

The python’s eerie stillness created a “false sense of security.”

“That rat would even run on top of the python and off the python thinking … ‘I’m safe in here,”’ says Mitchell.

“That python would then stare at that rat, and at an opportune time, it would lunge at top speed, coil that rat up, and then squeeze the life out of that rat until it was dead and then swallow that rat hole.”

The rat’s fate, he says, is what’s in store for America — especially her Christian population — if it doesn’t start recognizing radical Islam as the deadly python it is.

“[Radical Islam] is like a python sitting in the corner. It’s just sitting there while we are running around acting like we have a false sense of security — until the day comes when it lunges, and then it wraps its grips around all of our systems, all of our policies … and then chokes the life out of Christianity, chokes the life out of Western fundamentals, chokes the life out of everything,” says Mitchell.

He acknowledges the polarizing nature of this warning, but the risks are too steep to stay silent.

“People are going to push back against this one moment right here, Josh, I just invite them to come back to this podcast five years from now, 10 years from now, if the Lord tarries, 20 years from now, and see did God not raise up true voices to warn America that this is coming to your own detriment,” he forewarns.

To hear more, watch the episode above.

Join BlazeTV+ and start watching Josh today at blazetv.com/JOSH. Use promo code JOSH to get $20 off your subscription.

​Christianity, Islam, Josh howerton, Philip anthony mitchell, Blazetv show 

Conservative blogger Erick Erickson published an essay last week on Substack, “The Midwestern Führerbunker Driving the Right Off a Cliff,” maligning the Claremont Institute, one of our donors, and a few of our fellows and alumni.

Claremont Institute senior fellow Steve Hayward published the first in a promised series (“Is Conservatism in Crisis?”) on his Political Questions Substack, criticizing the tone, rhetorical tactics, and substance of Erickson’s essay. As Hayward shows, Erickson relies on guilt-by-association smears and innuendo that let the juxtaposition do the arguing.

It’s clear that Erickson wants merely to cherry-pick the document to stoke outrage with his readers.

Many of his citations come from untrustworthy and hostile sources, like the Guardian, which has published numerous hit pieces against Claremont. Erickson’s essay is a mile-wide, inch-deep bit of motivated reasoning.

At the top of his essay, a headnote by Erickson explains that he “worked on this for weeks.” We could have cleared up a lot of Erickson’s errors during those weeks had he followed the standard journalistic practice of reaching out to any of the parties or organizations he named for comment. He did not.

By his own account, Erickson let AI find the sources for his claims: “I wrote the piece and Claude found the links relevant to my claims. When Claude thought I was making weak claims or arguments, it challenged me to improve and clarify my writing and claims to match information in provided linked [sic].” That may explain why so many of his sources come from hostile outlets.

As a result, some friends of Claremont who are not close students of the internecine social media wars on the right are confused. I write to offer some clarity. The short version: Claremont’s mission remains, as it was when we were founded in 1979, “to restore the principles of the American founding to their rightful, preeminent place in our national life.”

The core of that work remains what Harry Jaffa called “the scholarship of the politics of freedom.” Many of our critics mistake the application of that scholarship to present circumstances for abandoning our principles.

Answering every insinuation in Erickson’s essay would be tedious; correcting the most serious is not. Consider four of his claims: about a donor, about a fraternal organization, about an essay in the American Mind, and about Nick Fuentes.

Erickson’s first target is Charles Haywood, a retired industrialist and philanthropist who runs the Worthy House website, where he routinely reviews, in spirited fashion, books on all manner of topics. Readers of Haywood know that he has a dim view of the prospects for the medium-term survival of the current American regime. He has constructed his city in speech, what he hopes will be a successor regime, in his “Foundationalist Manifesto.”

Erickson regards Haywood’s “Manifesto” as too statist. He wants us to gasp with him at Haywood’s deprecation of democracy. What Haywood favors, however, would not have been foreign to thinkers and statesmen from the American founding up through the turn of the 20th century: a republicanism with aristocratic elements, like elections and representatives rather than direct popular involvement in decision-making.

RELATED: Trump picked the wrong way to fight fake news

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Erickson objects that Haywood assigns to the central government “unlimited means,” but fails to include the rest of the sentence, which reads in full, “In pursuit of its limited ends, it will have unlimited means.” Claremont has always thought that the political philosophy of the founding, properly understood, should guide our constitutional analysis and reform. Haywood’s assessment is not the same as Claremont’s position, and reasonable people can dispute it.

But it’s clear that Erickson wants merely to cherry-pick the document to stoke outrage with his readers.

This outrage is a setup to suggest that because Haywood donates low six figures annually to Claremont and has an honorific “advisory” title common in the think tank philanthropic world, Claremont’s mission is now being subverted in favor of Haywood’s foundationalism.

No donor sets our agenda, and Haywood has never tried. He supports institutions on the right for the work they’re doing, in line with their own missions, to recover constitutionalism and defend the American way of life.

Erickson’s second target is closer to home: me. He indicts my involvement in the founding of a Christian fraternal organization, the Society for American Civic Renewal, and in so doing makes a serious charge that demands correction. One of SACR’s founding documents, writes Erickson, “describes the members as ‘un-hyphenated Americans.’ … The hyphen is there to screen for lineage, and it tells you the racial mindset of the organization.” This is false. The membership requirement for “unhyphenated Americans” is a reference to Theodore Roosevelt’s 1915 call for immigrants to assimilate and embrace American citizenship without qualification. SACR welcomes trinitarian Christian men of any race or ethnicity.

Fittingly, Roosevelt gave that speech to the Knights of Columbus, itself a Christian fraternal order. Few things are more American than Christian fraternal organizations, which have been around since our country’s founding.

The founding board of SACR in 2020 agreed with the theme of Yuval Levin’s book “A Time to Build.” We thought a decentralized fraternal organization for values-aligned men would be a useful institution in an ideologically divided and institutionally corrupt America. It has been gratifying to see lodges founded in several states, centered on friendship, shared love of country, and the many benefits such networks provide for local collaboration and mutual aid.

Erickson’s charge against the American Mind is more serious still. He claims that “Claremont’s American Mind has published the argument that conservatives must now be willing to commit violence of their own.” The essay in question, Hillsdale College professor Kevin Slack’s 2023 article “The Constitution, Citizenship, and the New Right,” does no such thing. The passage Erickson appears to be describing reads:

Many conservatives have now become convinced that, unless they are willing to allow their churches to be desecrated, their sacred services canceled, their property and liberty taken away, and their children indoctrinated or chemically castrated, they must be willing to engage in violence of their own.

Slack ends with a warning, not a call to arms:

Finally, the use of actual violence, which underlies the enforcement of all laws, including the natural law, has quickly become part of our machinations. And while I sympathize with any defense of natural right, I also fear it. Our first civil war was between states, but this new terrible war would be city against country, neighbor against neighbor, in the aisles of grocery stores, restaurants, and churches. I would not choose to live in this world, but America is fast becoming no country for old men. I still hope that we can appeal to genuine nationalism, celebrating America’s principles and its remarkable achievements, rejecting a false patriotism and tribalism.

In other words, Slack is describing what many conservatives have come to believe, not arguing that they are right. Erickson turns a description into a prescription.

Erickson throws Nick Fuentes and his “groypers” into the mix for good measure in the final third of the piece. He is careful to state that he doesn’t think anyone named so far is “coordinating with Fuentes.” (Quite right! I suspect Fuentes would object to any coordination with Claremont, as he has said publicly that we are untrustworthy because our chairman is Jewish.) But Erickson’s presentation is meant to leave the reader with the impression that this constellation of projects, writings, tweets, and people represents different flanks of a movement to overthrow the American Constitution.

While Erickson’s essay was making the rounds, I was on my way to Mount Vernon with Claremont colleagues to celebrate Constitution Day and honor Charles Kesler with the Salvatori Prize in the American Founding.

The evening featured short speeches from our Washington fellow Matthew Peterson, praising George Washington’s magnanimity and prudence; from our Salvatori Research Fellow in the American Founding, Glenn Ellmers, on the meaning of the Declaration at 250 after a century of progressivism; and from me, on the significant scholarly, editorial, and teaching achievements across Kesler’s five decades (and counting) of work.

It was an evening celebrating the work of the Claremont Institute and its scholars, surrounded by the Claremont family of alumni, supporters, and friends. That work, not the caricature in Erickson’s essay, is what Claremont is about.

We look forward to a good-faith debate with serious and honest interlocutors — let iron sharpen iron. The stakes are nothing less than the fate of America and the West.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published in the American Mind.

​Claremont institute, Erick erickson, Groypers, Knights of columbus, Nick fuentes, West, George washington, Theodore roosevelt, The guardian, Hillsdale college, The american mind, Charles haywood, Opinion & analysis 

A Missouri mother who said she accidentally placed her 1-month-old daughter in an oven instead of her crib, killing the infant, learned her fate earlier this week.

Mariah Thomas of Kansas City pleaded guilty Tuesday to first-degree endangering the welfare of a child resulting in death, KMBC-TV reported.

‘Mental illness does not erase accountability, but neither should our justice system ignore a serious, diagnosed mental health condition when determining an appropriate outcome.’

Kansas City police in February 2024 were called to a home near 41st Street and Forest Avenue after getting a report of a baby who wasn’t breathing, the station said.

Emergency crews tried to save the infant, but she died at the scene, KMBC reported.

Court documents filed at the time indicated that Thomas, now 28, told family members she was putting her daughter down for a nap and accidentally put the baby in the oven instead of her crib, the station said.

Fox News reported that the infant was wearing a bodysuit over a diaper, and investigators said her clothing appeared to have melted onto the diaper. Police also recovered a baby blanket with significant burn marks from the living room, the news network said, citing a probable cause statement.

As part of Tuesday’s plea agreement, a murder charge against Thomas was dropped, KMBC said.

The station added that the Jackson County Prosecutor’s Office issued a statement Thursday that noted in part: “We advocated for a resolution recognizing the seriousness of what happened, holding Ms. Thomas accountable and addressing her documented severe mental health issues.”

KMBC noted that the statement also said, “What has been underreported is our office advocated for Ms. Thomas to plead not guilty by reason of insanity, which would have resulted in her placement in a secure mental health treatment facility. Instead, she chose to plead guilty to 1st-degree endangerment of a child-death of a child and serve 13 years in prison.”

RELATED: Female accused of stabbing her newborn baby to death: ‘I have never seen anything this gruesome’

The statement also said, “Mental illness does not erase accountability, but neither should our justice system ignore a serious, diagnosed mental health condition when determining an appropriate outcome,” the station reported.

A Jackson County judge sentenced Thomas to 13 years in prison, with credit for time she has already served, KMBC reported.

Thomas was to be transferred to the Missouri Department of Corrections to serve her sentence, the station added.

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

​Missouri, Kansas city, Mother, Infant death, Oven, Arrest, Sentence, Crime 

It takes a lot to surprise me on TikTok. I go in expecting left-wing absurdity.

But recently I found a young woman in her 20s crying because she felt “overwhelmed” by the amount of content she would have to create for “Kinktober.” What’s that about?

Our country can’t get comfortable with sexually explicit content. It needs to be re-stigmatized, shamed, and kept from public life.

Kinktober is the sexually explicit offspring of Inktober, an online challenge that encourages artists and writers to create one themed work every day in October. Kinktober takes the same format and fills it with sexual prompts.

One 2026 prompt list circulating online includes bestiality, intoxication, age-gap sex, and a long list of fetishes too vile to publish here.

The strange part is not that adults have invented another sexual subculture. Humans hardly needed the internet for that. The strange part is how easily that subculture now spills onto mainstream platforms.

One woman posted a TikTok praising the Kinktober list as “great” and urging artists to get “freak nasty.” Another video showed a woman leaving college early to go “celebrate” Kinktober. Commenters chimed in enthusiastically.

Tumblr hosts sexual artwork and writing. Reddit users direct participants toward Archive of Our Own, the enormous fan-fiction site commonly known as AO3. Kinktober collections there contain thousands of works.

Kinktober is not the kind of thing that happens in a healthy society. It is the kind of thing that happens in a society that has glamorized sexual promiscuity and allowed the most aggressive, X-rated content to be available to anyone at the touch of a button.

Kinktober has emerged in a culture dominated by OnlyFans and PornHub. Oversexualization is nearly unavoidable. Stars like Sabrina Carpenter mimic sexually suggestive acts onstage. Bonnie Blue makes content about setting records for having sex with hundreds of men. Even Sydney Sweeney, who has largely been embraced by many on the right for standing up against Hollywood’s feminist agenda, has posed in highly sexual public ads.

RELATED: Sophie Cunningham defends Sydney Sweeney — but admits she ‘morally’ has a problem

Chris Graythen/Getty Images

In this cultural climate, Kinktober doesn’t seem as perverted as it is.

The consequences extend beyond adults who deliberately seek this material. A 2026 Common Sense Media survey of American teenagers ages 13 to 17 found that 74% had seen online pornography. More than half of those who had seen it first encountered it by age 12, including 12% who first saw it at age 10 or younger.

Young people do not need to walk into an adult store or lie about their age to an embarrassed clerk. Sexual content reaches them through phones, social media feeds, websites, and links.

Written erotica also deserves more attention than it gets. One study of 456 readers of erotic fiction found that 94% of respondents were women. That does not mean women universally consume erotica, of course. It does show that pornography does not come only in the visual form most people associate with men.

Kinktober packages that kind of material as a creative exercise. Write something every day. Draw something every day. Share it. Tag it. Find a community around it.

The internet is exceptionally good at turning private interests into communities and communities into identities. It also strips away much of the social friction that once separated an obscure fetish from ordinary public life.

That friction served a purpose.

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

Jeff Kravitz/FilmMagic/Getty Images

Prior to the sexual revolution of the 1960s, it was unthinkable that a nearly endless library of sexual content could be available on platforms that rarely enforce age restrictions. Today, we are constantly being inundated with content that is increasingly grotesque.

Kinktober may currently be relegated to online spaces, but it probably won’t be for very long. The prompts it suggests, such as bestiality, age gap, and collars, are all slowly making their way into the mainstream.

Bestiality is slowly becoming destigmatized as furries are normalized, with furry conventions and gatherings growing in attendance each year. Age-gap relationships are being pushed by leftists who have tried to include pedophilia in the LGBT community under the guise of being “minor-attracted persons.” Even collars are being worn in public, along with chains and leatherware that is highly suggestive and inappropriate.

We need to realize that what happens online often makes its way into the real world. Internet trends are a primary source of American culture. Parents need to protect their children from websites like Tumblr, AO3, and TikTok, which promote challenges like Kinktober. Our country can’t get comfortable with sexually explicit content. It needs to be re-stigmatized, shamed, and kept from public life.

​Bestiality, Furries, Identity, Kinktober, Lgbt community, Onlyfans, Parents, Pornhub, Reddit, Sabrina carpenter, Sexual revolution, Tiktok, Opinion & analysis 

Georgia police say the search of a suspect’s apartment unit led to the discovery of several blood-stained areas, a large bloody saw, and the strong odor of bleach.

The family of a 26-year-old mother said they contacted police Wednesday after she went missing and they tracked her phone at the Park Valley apartment complex on Valley Parkway in Smyrna.

The family said they knew it was Mosley because they saw the same tattoo she had on the torso.

Michelle Weaver told WSB-TV that her niece Tia Mosley was DoorDashing when she went missing. When police arrived, they knocked on a few doors and then left the scene, according to Weaver.

That’s when the family noted that a strange young man was looking at them through his window at the complex.

Weaver said the family spoke to a man at the unit who told them he had not seen Mosley.

Then at about 8 p.m., they saw the man carrying a tub with a quilt on top of it. A Cobb County Magistrate Court warrant said the man appeared to realize that someone had seen him and ran back to his unit after dropping the bin.

“All we see is the boy throwing a bag, like, like maybe a laundry bag, and it had like a container in it,” Weaver said.

Inside the bin was a dismembered torso of a woman.

Police later identified the man as 18-year-old Kingston Lammar Bradley.

They searched Bradley’s unit and found the saw, bloody areas, a smell of bleach, and various cleaning supplies that included a mop, a bucket of water, and carpet cleaner.

Bradley was charged with concealing a death and is considered a person of interest in the murder investigation.

“We are continuing to do interviews to see if there are any other possible suspects that could be out there,” said Lt. Meredith Holt of the Smyrna Police Department.

The family said they knew it was Mosley because they saw the same tattoo she had on the torso.

RELATED: Man allegedly caught on video stuffing body parts into suitcase — police say it was his elderly stepfather

One neighbor said they heard Bradley say, “What did I do? What did I do?” when police arrested him.

Another neighbor said they heard Bradley’s father also say, “What did you do this time?”

The family criticized the police for not doing enough to find Mosley’s remains when they reported her missing.

“Don’t say y’all found her. Her family found her. Y’all didn’t do nothing. Y’all left us,” Weaver said. “You guys left us to do it ourselves.”

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

​Dismemberment, Doordash, Georgia, Missing woman, Crime 

We’ve reached peak “View,” and we still have three months to go in the year.

Even a Rosie O’Donnell reunion couldn’t top the insanity on a single “View” episode this week. Wednesday’s installment had co-host Sara Haines wishing that Lindsay Clancy’s husband had honored the whole “in sickness and in health” line from their wedding vows.

He won’t be the first person daffy enough to write checks for Gaza dwellers. The terror group that runs Gaza is notorious for taking the money and running, Woody Allen style.

That’s a real thing.

The same episode saw co-host Sunny Hostin bragging that she had been a holdout juror in the 1991 trial of Daniel Rakowitz, the “Butcher of Tompkins Square Park.” Rakowitz — who murdered and dismembered his roommate — was ultimately found not guilty by reason of insanity.

Hostin now says she recognized that Rakowitz was psychotic and persuaded the other jurors “one by one” to come around to her view. Yes, she’s proud of that legacy. The only problem is that contemporaneous reporting — including Hostin’s own comments at the time — makes her heroic 35-year-old recollection considerably messier.

“The View” capped off the episode with co-host Joy Behar bemoaning that we won’t have a woman president anytime soon.

That’s a 10 out of 10 even on the Russian judge’s scorecard of perfect “View” episodes. No notes …

Box-office ‘bomb’ for Hezbollah

The man who gave us “What Is a Woman?” and “Am I Racist?” is back with another must-see documentary. Director Justin Folk took a break from frequent collaborator Matt Walsh to shoot “Paging Hezbollah,” the kind of documentary no Hollywood studio would touch.

Folk’s film breaks down the “Trojan Horse”-like campaign to give bomb-laden tech to Hezbollah leaders, one of the most devious strategies ever assembled.

Standing by for Javier Bardem and Macklemore to boycott the film in 3 … 2 …

‘Saw’ turns it up to 11

Just as with horror villains, no horror franchise is ever dead-dead.

Even that recent horrific “Exorcist” reboot didn’t stop the franchise from rebooting itself anew. Now it’s “Saw’s” turn.

To be fair, the first “Saw” film from 2004 was ingenious and creepy, but subsequent editions defined the “torture porn” era. No thanks.

Nostalgia still reigns supreme, so a new “Saw” film is in the offing. The only upside? Horror veterans James Wan (“The Conjuring,” “Insidious”) and original “Saw” scribe Leigh Whannell are back to produce the 11th film in the saga.

Sick of Jigsaw and his gruesome game nights? A better alternative might be a couple of well-made “Saw” spoofs that imagine sharing an office and an apartment with the series’ sinister “star” Billy the Puppet.

RELATED: Chuck Norris died. The Emmys were still too scared to say his name.

NBC/CBS Photo Archive/Getty Images

Macklemore’s Palestine-apalooza

Does he even care where the money will go?

Far-left rapper Macklemore is making the most of his career revival. He previously made a stink by lecturing fans as the opening act for apolitical superstar Ed Sheeran. Now riding that publicity wave, he’s going on his own tour.

The catch? All ticket sales will go to the Palestinians. Oh, really.

He won’t be the first person daffy enough to write checks for Gaza dwellers. The terror group that runs Gaza is notorious for taking the money and running, Woody Allen style. Even if he means well, celebrities have a lousy track record of making sure donating funds go where they should.

Just ask the folks behind Fire Aid.

“It’s 2026. Being apolitical during a genocide doesn’t work anymore,” he said in a statement tied to a tour that will start in Dublin, Ireland. That country is notorious of late for its unbridled anti-Semitism.

We’ll leave it at that.

Perhaps he’ll spend his down time reading what the word “genocide” actually means …

Cruise fears box-office burial

The Last Movie Star could be in trouble.

Tom Cruise’s October 2 release, “Digger,” had all the Oscar buzz heading into the fall … until people actually saw it. The “first reactions” pieces tied to the satire were all over the map, with plenty of people calling it a dud.

Remember, “first reaction” stories almost always skew positive, sometimes cartoonishly so. So this is a bad sign. Now the film’s box-office hopes are similarly shrinking.

Cruise clearly hopes this outlandish role — he plays an oil tycoon blamed for causing an eco-disaster — would snag him that long-coveted Oscar.

If the word of mouth gets any worse, he may have to settle for a Razzie.

​Genocide, Hezbollah, Lindsay clancy, Macklemore, Movies, Palestine, Patrick clancy, Television, The view, Tom cruise, Toto recall