“This case could completely wipe out the ATF’s ability to create law and subvert congress, which would be a massive win for the Second Amendment.” [more…]
Category: blaze media
AOC, Omar, and Crockett SINK EVEN LOWER with vile attacks on Charlie Kirk
Some Democrats have not only been showing their true colors, but wearing them proudly in the aftermath of the Charlie Kirk assassination, as they publicly double down on their disgusting remarks about the Turning Point founder.
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) is one of the worst offenders, who was confronted by CNN’s Kaitlan Collins for her “jarring” comments about Charlie Kirk after his murder.
“What I find jarring is that there’s so many people willing to excuse the most reprehensible things that he said that they agree with, that they’re willing to have monuments for him, that they want to create a day to honor him, and that they want to produce resolutions in the House of Congress, honoring his life and legacy,” Omar said on CNN.
“It is one thing to care about his life because obviously so many people loved him, including his children and wife, but I am not going to sit here and be judged for not wanting to honor any legacy this man has left behind. That should be in the dustbin of history, and we should hopefully move on and forget the hate that he spewed every single day,” she added.
Omar isn’t alone in her open disdain for the late Charlie Kirk.
“We should be clear about who Charlie Kirk was: a man who believed that the Civil Rights Act that granted Black Americans the right to vote was a ‘mistake,’ who after the violent attack on Paul Pelosi claimed that ‘some amazing patriot out there’ should bail out his assailant, and accused Jews of controlling ‘not just the colleges — it’s the nonprofits, it’s the movies, it’s Hollywood, it’s all of it,’” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) wrote in a post on X.
While spouting information that BlazeTV host Stu Burguiere explains is “completely made up,” the congresswoman went on to claim that his “rhetoric and beliefs were ignorant.”
“They’ll break any rule to stay on point here,” Stu says. “Their point of course being, ‘We can’t honor Charlie Kirk as a person because he said something I didn’t like once.’ Now, of course, people say stuff that I don’t like all the time. I still can be sad when they get killed.”
But it doesn’t end with AOC, as Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) made sure her opinion was known as well.
“A resolution that came before the House this past week honoring Charlie Kirk, and there were 58 Democrats who voted against it. You were one. Why?” CNN’s Dana Bash asked Crockett in an interview.
“When I saw the ‘no’ votes, there were only two Caucasians. For the most part, the only people that voted ‘no’ were people of color,” Crockett said. “Because the rhetoric that Charlie Kirk continuously put out there was rhetoric that specifically targeted people of color. And so, it is unfortunate that even our colleagues could not see how harmful his rhetoric was specifically to us.”
“So if there was any way that I was going to honor somebody who decided that they were going to negatively talk about me and proclaim that I was somehow involved in the ‘Great White Replacement,’ yeah, I’m not honoring that kind of stuff,” she added.
Stu is shocked, saying, “Blatant lies.”
“I mean, it’s just incredible that even after a man is just shot in front of our eyes, they can’t even bring themselves to say anything that’s true,” he adds. “It is really fascinating, the discipline.”
Want more from Stu?
To enjoy more of Stu’s lethal wit, wisdom, and mockery, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Upload, Sharing, Camera phone, Video, Free, Video phone, Youtube.com, Stu does america, Stu burguiere, Charlie kirk, Charlie kirk murder, Charlie kirk assassination, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Aoc, Ilhan omar, Democrats, Alexandria ocasio cortez, Jasmine crockett, Leftists, Cnn, Cnn bias
The forgotten Jim Carrey interview that got him labeled ‘anti-vaxx’
Over a decade ago, actor Jim Carrey and actress Jenny McCarthy were put in the hot seat on “Larry King Live” for their views on vaccines — which labeled them anti-vaxxers in the eyes of all Americans, left or right.
“I don’t know what happened in 1990. There was no plague that was killing children that we had to triple the amount of vaccines,” McCarthy said to Carrey and King.
“What happened after 1989 that warranted 26 more vaccines?” Carrey chimed in, to which McCarthy answered, “Greed.”
“Are all of them absolutely necessary?” Carrey asked. “It’s twice as many as anywhere else in 30 countries in the Western world. We give twice as many shots as any of those countries. Why is that?”
McCarthy went on to advocate for parents educating themselves and asking questions like, “Do we need to have the chicken pox? Do we need the hepatitis B shot on the second day of life?”
“I don’t think we can afford to assume that the people who are charged with our public health any longer have our best interests at heart all the time. Parents have to make their own decisions — educated decisions. They have to look at the information,” Carrey explained.
“Space out the vaccines; delay them until after [age] 1. Clean out the toxins that are in them. We don’t need that many,” McCarthy added.
“Why would a doctor not want to know more about something that could save a life or prevent a disease?” King asked.
“The AAP is financed by the drug companies. Medical schools are financed by the drug companies. This is a huge business. Vaccines are the largest growing division of the pharmaceutical industry. $13 billion. What we’re asking is for them to take a loss for the good of our children. That’s a tough sell in a boardroom,” Carrey answered.
“Wow,” BlazeTV host Pat Gray comments on “Pat Gray Unleashed.” “It’s amazing Jim Carrey survived that, you know, because the left doesn’t like that stuff, right?”
“And they got it from both sides 15 years ago,” executive producer Keith Malinak says before pointing out that the vaccine industry is now at $1.6 trillion a year instead of $13 billion.
“When you do have the weight of the federal government and world agencies behind you pushing the shot that they want everyone and their brother to take multiple times since 2020, that’s going to pad your profits a little bit,” he adds.
Want more from Pat Gray?
To enjoy more of Pat’s biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Camera phone, Upload, Video, Video phone, Sharing, Free, Youtube.com, Pat gray unleashed, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Jenny mccarthy, Anti-vaxxers, Anti-vaxx, Vaccine schedule, Vaccine schedule 1990s, Jim carrey questions vaccines, Jim carrey, Larry king live, Pat gray, Keith malinak
Drones shut down airports in NATO countries as suspicion falls on Russia
An unexplained drone incursion shut down the largest airport in Scandinavia on Monday evening, prompting officials to question whether Russia was responsible.
Danish officials reported that a “professional actor” was likely responsible for flying multiple drones over the Copenhagen Airport, causing a four-hour shutdown. Large drones have been spotted at five regional airports in Denmark.
‘We have seen drones over Poland that should not have been there. We have seen activity in Romania. We have seen violations of Estonian airspace.’
Monday’s incident marks the latest in a series of drone sightings to cause a significant disruption to transportation infrastructure in NATO countries.
“It’s definitely not a coincidence. It looks systematic,” Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen stated during a Thursday press conference.
Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen called the incident “the most serious attack on Danish critical infrastructure to date.”
The same evening, a separate drone incident interrupted operations at Norway’s Oslo Airport.
RELATED: Xi, Putin, and Modi join forces to reject West’s fading world order
Photo by STEVEN KNAP/Ritzau Scanpix/AFP via Getty Images
Danish police Chief Superintendent Jens Jespersen stated that it is too soon to say whether the incidents in Denmark and Norway were linked.
While officials have not stated who was responsible for the drone incursions in Denmark, there is speculation that Russia may have been responsible, considering that earlier this month, Poland shot down several Russian drones and Russian fighter jets violated Estonian airspace.
“I cannot rule out that it is Russia,” Frederiksen stated. “We have seen drones over Poland that should not have been there. We have seen activity in Romania. We have seen violations of Estonian airspace.”
RELATED: Trump defends Zelenskyy against Russian official: ‘It’s all bulls**t’
Photo by SERGEI GAPON/AFP via Getty Images
The Kremlin called the speculation “unfounded.”
Moscow’s ambassador to Denmark, Vladimir Barbin, claimed that the incident “clearly reflects an attempt to provoke NATO countries into direct military confrontation with Russia.”
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said that it is “too early to say” who is responsible.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
News, Denmark, Norway, Poland, Estonia, Russia, Drone, Airport, Copenhagen, Copenhagen airport, Nato, Politics
Acting ICE director joins Glenn Beck to address deadly Dallas shooting investigation
Questions are still unanswered after a gunman opened fire at a Dallas ICE facility on Wednesday morning.
Todd Lyons, the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, spoke with Glenn Beck on “The Glenn Beck Program” Thursday morning to give an update on the investigation and to discuss the current milieu of violence in our country.
‘I’ve never seen anything like this in my career.’
Beck started the interview with a question about the rising tide of violence in the United States. Lyons told him, “I’ve never seen anything like this in my career.” However, Lyons added that the violence “won’t deter us,” noting that brave law enforcement officers continued their dangerous work on Thursday.
RELATED: DHS: Deadly Dallas ICE shooting came a month after bomb threat at same office
While Lyons didn’t want to get ahead of the official investigation, he did dispel media rumors about the shooter’s motive after the three victims, two murdered and one injured, were determined to be immigration detainees. Lyons told Beck this was “a pure attack on ICE law enforcement and ICE’s mission.”
“He didn’t know who was in the vehicle,” Lyons added. It would be “dead wrong” to suggest any other motive other than “anti-ICE,” as was written on the unspent shell and demonstrated by the nature of the shooting.
They also discussed the Trump administration’s crackdown on left-wing terrorism, particularly concerning reports about the John Brown Gun Club’s alleged “Hey, fascist! Catch!” posters. Lyons suggested that many of these left-wing agitators are “professional” with “no ties to the community” — all the more reason to fight against them as domestic terrorists.
Photo by Stewart F. House/Getty Images
Beck also asked Lyons about the coverage of a recent arrest made by law enforcement that received “distorted” coverage by NBC and other outlets. NBC reported that law enforcement “held” a 5-year-old autistic girl hostage in an attempt to negotiate the arrest of the girl’s father. According to DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin, the man “fled from the car, gave officers the double middle finger, and darted inside his house. He abandoned his 5-year-old daughter in the car.”
NBC later issued a correction, stating that its initial reporting “mischaracterized the activities of ICE agents in the video.”
Lyons made it clear that the father fled the vehicle and that law enforcement simply took care of the girl during that time.
Beck and Lyons also took aim at Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s recent comments about ICE being “authoritarian.” “The governor shouldn’t have said that,” Lyons told Beck. He added that the masks worn by law enforcement are a matter of safety as officers have seen a rise in doxxing and threats to their livelihood.
Lyons announced that the U.S. attorney will be holding a press conference Thursday afternoon.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Politics, Todd lyons, Glenn beck, Dallas ice shooting, Ice, Acting ice director, Dallas, Gavin newsom, John brown gun club
White House dares Democrats with nuclear response to looming shutdown
While Democrats continue to dig their heels in ahead of the looming deadline to avert a government shutdown, the White House has made clear that the administration is willing to go nuclear.
The Office of Management and Budget, headed by Director Russell Vought, escalated the already tense funding fight by threatening mass firings across the federal workforce if Democrats shut down the government. In a new memo, the OMB directed agencies to identify programs whose funding lapses after the September 30 deadline and instructed them to begin drafting reduction in force notes for employees who may be affected.
Democrats introduced their own bill containing a $1.5 trillion ‘progressive reckless wish list.’
“Over the past 10 fiscal years, Congress has consistently passed Continuing Resolutions on or by September 30 on a bipartisan basis,” the memo reads. “Unfortunately, congressional Democrats are signaling that they intend to break this bipartisan trend and shut down the government in the coming days over a series of insane demands, including $1 trillion in new spending.”
“As such, it has never been more important for the administration to be prepared for a shutdown if the Democrats choose to pursue one.”
RELATED: GOP slams Democrat spending plan as ‘stale leftovers’ riddled with radical left-wing policies
Photo by ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty Images
The House narrowly passed the GOP-led continuing resolution in a 217-212 vote, seeking to keep the government open through November 21. The funding bill was a clean 91-page CR that included anomalies to increase funding for security, allocating $30 million for Congress, $30 million for the executive branch, and $28 million for the judicial branch.
As the memo points out, the clean CR was consistent with previous bipartisan funding bills. Despite this, Democrats refused to reach across the aisle to keep the government open and instead introduced their own bill containing a $1.5 trillion “progressive reckless wish list.”
The Senate is now tasked with taking up the CR just days before the deadline.
Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said the Trump administration’s threat to fire federal workers is just an “attempt at intimidation.” Notably, the shutdown would not affect programs like Social Security, Medicare, veterans’ benefits, law enforcement, military operations, Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and air traffic control.
“This is an attempt at intimidation,” Schumer said in a post on X. “Donald Trump has been firing federal workers since day one — not to govern, but to scare. This is nothing new and has nothing to do with funding the government. These unnecessary firings will either be overturned in court or the administration will end up hiring the workers back, just like they did as recently as this week.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
White house, Donald trump, Trump administration, Russ vought, Russell vought, Office of management and budget, Senate democrats, House democrats, House republicans, Senate republicans, Chuck schumer, Federal layoffs, Government shutdown, Continuing resolution, Schumer shutdown, Funding fight, Politics
Fact-check: Tylenol confirms 2017 pregnancy warning tweet is authentic
President Donald Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced on Monday that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration will notify physicians that acetaminophen use by pregnant women may be associated with a “very increased risk” of neurological conditions like autism and ADHD in children.
This announcement prompted debate about the safety of acetaminophen, which is the active ingredient in Tylenol and the leading cause of acute livery injury in the United States.
‘If pregnant or breast-feeding, ask a health professional before use.’
Amid efforts to downplay possible risks of Tylenol usage during pregnancy by medical professionals and by foreign health organizations, online sleuths uncovered old yet thematically relevant messages Tylenol apparently shared on social media. Two of those messages went viral this week.
The first tweet, which is dated June 17, 2019, states, “Congrats on your upcoming addition! SO exciting! It’d be great to touch base real quick since we haven’t tested Tylenol to be used during pregnancy.”
The second tweet, dated March 7, 2017, states, “We actually don’t recommend using any of our products while pregnant. Thank you for taking the time to voice your concerns today.”
The second tweet was reposted on X both by the White House, with an image of Trump holding a hat emblazoned with the message, “Trump was right about everything,” and by the Department of Health and Human Services with the caption, “No caption needed.”
Some social media users expressed doubt that Tylenol was actually responsible for the original tweet; others seized on the tweet as validation of the president’s recent warnings about taking acetaminophen; and a few claimed it was being grossly misinterpreted.
Fact: The tweet is authentic.
When asked about the tweet, a spokesperson for Kenvue, the maker of Tylenol, told Blaze News, “This post from 2017 is being taken out of context.”
“We do not recommend pregnant women take any medication without talking to their doctor,” continued the statement. “This is consistent with the regulations and product label for acetaminophen.”
Screenshot of correspondence with Kenvue.
This messaging is consistent with what appeared on the drug’s warning label as of 2019.
In addition to highlighting the risk of “severe skin reactions” and “severe liver damage” if taken in excess or in conjunction with certain other substances, the packaging states: “If pregnant or breast-feeding, ask a health professional before use.”
RELATED: Trump administration claims link between autism and Tylenol, greenlights remedy
Photo Illustration by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
Similar language appeared in a Feb. 13, 2017, tweet in which Tylenol wrote, “Just make sure to talk to your doctor before taking Tylenol while you’re pregnant.”
When asked whether Tylenol poses an elevated risk to pregnant women and/or their unborn children and why pregnant women need to consult their doctors prior to use, a spokesperson for Kenvue, formerly the consumer health care division of Johnson & Johnson, provided the following response to Blaze News:
“The post did not address the full guidance — which has not changed:
“Acetaminophen is the safest pain reliever option for pregnant women as needed throughout their entire pregnancy. “Our products are safe and effective when used as directed on the product label. “We recommend pregnant women do not take any over-the-counter medication, including acetaminophen, without talking to their doctor first.”
Tylenol’s updated frequently asked questions webpage has a section on acetaminophen and autism, which states: “Our best advice? Talk to your healthcare professional before taking or administering acetaminophen.”
The FAQ also states: “Please know that there is no credible science that shows taking acetaminophen causes autism.”
‘The majority of the studies reported positive associations of prenatal acetaminophen use with ADHD, ASD, or NDDs in offspring.’
There has long been evidence of an association between prenatal acetaminophen exposure and neurodevelopmental disorders including autism — an association the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and some of the other outfits now defending Tylenol once admitted.
For example:
A 2013 HHS-backed study published in the International Journal of Epidemiology concluded that “children exposed to long-term use of paracetamol during pregnancy had substantially adverse developmental outcomes at 3 years of age.”A 2017 study published in the Journal of International Medical Research said, “The bottom line is that hundreds of studies describing the epidemiology of autism and the numerous and varied risk factors for autism have a straightforward explanation: autism could be an acetaminophen-induced brain injury facilitated by oxidative stress and inflammation in newborns and young children.”A National Institutes of Health-funded 2019 study published in the journal JAMA Psychiatry indicated that “[umbilical] cord biomarkers of fetal exposure to acetaminophen were associated with significantly increased risk of childhood ADHD and ASD in a dose-response fashion.”A 2023 scientific review published in the Swiss journal Children concluded “without reasonable doubt and with no evidence to the contrary that exposure of susceptible babies and children to acetaminophen (paracetamol) induces many, if not most, cases of autism spectrum disorder.”A 2024 study published in the journal Clinical and Experimental Pediatrics noted that “careful examination reveals no valid objections to the conclusion that early exposure to acetaminophen causes neurodevelopmental injury in susceptible babies and children.”An NIH-supported systematic review published last month in the medical journal Environmental Health noted on the basis of an analysis of scores of studies regarding the relationship between neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and prenatal exposure to acetaminophen, that “overall, the majority of the studies reported positive associations of prenatal acetaminophen use with ADHD, ASD, or NDDs in offspring, with risk-of-bias and strength-of-evidence ratings informing the overall synthesis.”
“Don’t take Tylenol,” Trump said on Monday. “Fight like hell not to take it.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Tylenol, Acetaminophen, Paracetamol, Drug, Big pharma, Kenvue, Donald trump, Fact check, Trump, Robert f kennedy jr, Rfk, Health and human services, Fda, Health, Maha, Politics
‘Hey, fascist! Catch!’ Leftist group apparently recruiting college students with slogan tied to Kirk murder
Left-wing organizers appear to have posted flyers advertising their club at Georgetown University with the same slogans found on bullet casings near where Charlie Kirk was murdered.
The John Brown Gun Club reportedly posted bright red flyers around campus recruiting students with the phrase, “Hey, fascist! Catch!” in bold text. The flyer also brags that the John Brown Gun Club is “the only political group that celebrates when Nazis die,” likely referencing Kirk’s horrific assassination on September 10.
‘There are students at this campus who want to see conservatives dead.’
Shae McInnis, a sophomore at Georgetown University who also serves as the treasurer of the College Republicans Club on campus, found the posters Wednesday morning.
“I read this immediately as a threat, not only for me but for everyone on this campus,” McInnis told Fox News Digital. “Every conservative, everyone who just does not subscribe to the prevailing leftist orthodoxy, this is a direct threat against them.”
RELATED: Dozens of ‘morally bankrupt’ Democrats vote against condemning Charlie Kirk’s assassination
Photo by Trent Nelson/The Salt Lake Tribune/Getty Images
“It means that there are students at this campus who want to see conservatives dead rather than engaging with their ideas, rather than facilitating a political discourse,” McInnis added.
The John Brown Gun Club is a leftist group that originally “sought to militarize the white working class and spur it toward a social-justice revolution,” according to the Counter Extremism Project. Although the club claims to simply act as armed security at protests, local chapters have often been associated with other left-wing militant groups like Antifa and have been involved in violent attacks.
Most notably, one chapter member, Willem van Spronsen, was killed by law enforcement in 2019 after he tried to blow up an ICE detention center using a propane tank and Molotov cocktails at the facility.
RELATED: Suspected gunman in deadly attack on Texas ICE office identified
Photo by David McNew/Getty Images
Since the flyers were found on campus, a spokesperson for Georgetown University said they have been removed and that the incident is being investigated.
“Georgetown University has no tolerance for calls for violence or threats to the university,” the spokesperson said. “The flyers have been removed and the university is investigating this incident and working to ensure the safety of our community.”
Georgetown did not respond to a request for further comment by Blaze News.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Georgetown university, Charlie kirk, Charlie kirk assassination, Charlie kirk murder, Antifa, John brown club, John brown gun club, College republicans, Radical left, Political violence, Political polarization, Donald trump, Politics
Warren faces continuing backlash over outlandish response to Kimmel controversy
While many on the left are tearfully applauding Jimmy Kimmel’s return to the low-rated late-night airwaves, Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts is getting mocked and ridiculed for her histrionic response.
Warren suggested that communications companies had kowtowed to the demands of the Trump administration in order to secure government approval for their business deals and called for an investigation into the matter.
‘Kimmel is back, but many Americans won’t be able to watch. … I’m pressing for answers on potential corruption.’
“Last-minute settlements, secret side deals, multi-billion dollar mergers pending Donald Trump’s approval,” Warren posted after Kimmel was suspended. “Trump silencing free speech stifles our democracy. It sure looks like giant media companies are enabling his authoritarianism.”
The Disney corporation, which is also the parent company of ABC Television, announced Monday that Kimmel’s show would return the next evening. Two owners of ABC affiliates, Sinclair and Nexstar, said their stations would continue pre-empting the show.
Warren accused them of “possible corruption.”
“Kimmel is back, but many Americans won’t be able to watch,” she wrote. “Two companies — Nexstar and Sinclair — control hundreds of local TV stations and have business deals pending Donald Trump’s approval. They won’t air Kimmel tonight. I’m pressing for answers on potential corruption.”
Warren was mocked and ridiculed by many on the right on social media.
“Senator Warren working on the important issues … like why some TV stations are not airing Jimmy Kimmel’s terrible show no one was watching. She’s investigating!” joked the DuPage County Republican Party.
“You people are unbelievable. Not only are we supposed to just accept that he has a constitutional right to a multi-million-dollar a year job starring in a bad TV show that no one watches, now TV operators are also obligated to surrender their discretion to air his show, too?” replied Rafael Mangual of the Manhattan Institute.
“Why? Does the government have a right to tell people what to air on their stations?” replied author Kate Cornell.
RELATED: Sinclair backs out of airing Charlie Kirk on its ABC stations — here’s what it did instead
“Stifle it, you raging harridan. You didn’t so much as offer a peep of complaint when the Biden Administration was forcing social media companies to de-platform citizens for exercising their First Amendment rights,” responded another detractor.
“Trump never censored Jimmy Kimmel. It was a business decision by Disney and ABC affiliates. Stop lying to the American public like you did about your race,” read another response.
The president has threatened to sue ABC over its agreeing to return Kimmel to his show.
“I think we’re going to test ABC out on this. Let’s see how we do,” he wrote.
“A true bunch of losers! Let Jimmy Kimmel rot in his bad Ratings.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Liz warren, Jimmy kimmel, Rightwing online reaction, Kimmel cancellation, Politics
Nearly 25 thugs smash up jewelry store with crowbars, pickaxes, steal $1 million in merch — but tech helps police battle back
Nearly 25 masked, hooded individuals were caught on video descending upon a jewelry store in broad daylight this week in San Ramon, California, and stealing an estimated $1 million in merchandise, KGO-TV reported.
Police said the suspects — armed with crowbars and pickaxes and at least three guns — smashed display cases and grabbed whatever they could get their hands on during Monday afternoon’s heist at Heller Jewelers, the station said.
‘This is not their first time doing something like this.’
“When they went in, they basically took over the store,” Lt. Mike Pistello of the San Ramon Police Department told KGO. “Basically taking whatever jewelry was available.”
More from the station:
Cellphone video captured the suspects locked inside the store at one point. Police say at least one suspect fired multiple rounds to break open the glass door and escape. The door was part of a security upgrade installed after a previous robbery in 2023, requiring a security guard to press a button to let people out.
“What ended up happening was, once the suspects went in, the door locked behind them,” Pistello noted to KGO.
RELATED: Video: Mob of hammer-wielding, hooded thugs pull off brazen smash-and-grab robbery in broad daylight
The suspects arrived in six vehicles, parking in the valet area just 100 feet from the store entrance, the station said.
A drone funded by a 2023 grant to fight organized retail theft captured video of the suspects fleeing the store and entering their vehicles, KGO noted.
Police told the station that drone video along with video from surveillance cameras and bystanders as well as help from nearby agencies led to the arrest of seven suspects.
More from KGO:
Three adults and one juvenile were taken into custody in Oakland with assistance from Oakland police. Three other adults were arrested at the Dublin BART station by Alameda County sheriff’s deputies.
The suspects range in age from 17 to 31 and are all from Oakland. Police believe they are connected to similar crimes across the Bay Area. …
Two firearms and some jewelry were recovered, including items that may have been dropped or discarded during the escape. Police say several of the vehicles used in the robbery were reported stolen.
“This is not their first time doing something like this,” Pistello noted to the station.
KGO said detectives are trying to identify and arrest the remaining suspects. Pistello added to the station that while the investigation could take months, he expressed confidence that the department would ultimately solve multiple cases tied to the group.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Smash and grab, Jewelry store, California, Broad daylight, San ramon, Arrests, Technology, Drones, Video, Crime
BRAINWASHED Keith Olbermann attacks right-wing influencer
Former ESPN broadcaster Keith Olbermann is exhibiting what BlazeTV host Jason Whitlock calls “the worst case of Trump derangement we have in America.”
In response to a tweet from CNN’s Scott Jennings about late-night host Jimmy Kimmel and his anti-Charlie Kirk comments, Olbermann wrote in a now-deleted tweet, “You’re next, motherf***er.”
“But keep mugging to the camera,” he added in another tweet.
Jennings replied by tagging FBI Director Kash Patel, writing “Cc: @FBIDirectorKashPatel.”
“I don’t blame Scott Jennings, because Olbermann is setting a tone out there that, like, ‘Hey, Scott Jennings is worthy of death because I disagree with him because he’s conservative,’” Whitlock says.
“I didn’t think it could get any worse for Keith Olbermann, but it is,” he continues. “And he actually needs help. I mean real help. Someone needs to do a mental health check on Keith Olbermann and get him some additional help.”
BlazeTV contributor Steve Kim agrees, but is saddened by Olbermann’s fall from grace.
“I always thought, ‘Man, this is a highly intelligent individual,’” Kim says of growing up watching his career. “Now he’s just become deranged. And I don’t have an issue with his political beliefs.”
“I really don’t. We have to be honest about this. We’re not going to agree with everybody. But the extreme that he takes it now, to a point of, basically — I don’t even know if it’s a veiled threat,” he continues.
“It seemed like a threat, not from him, but almost an invitation for someone else to do it because you are talking about tone and tenor within our current climate in America. It’s almost like he’s saying, ‘Please, someone do this,’” he adds.
Want more from Jason Whitlock?
To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Sharing, Free, Video, Video phone, Camera phone, Upload, Youtube.com, Fearless with jason whitlock, Fearless, Jason whitlock, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Keith olbermann, Tds, Trump derangement syndrome, Scott jennings, Cnn, Jimmy kimmel, Free speech, Censorship
Trump’s Berlin Wall moment for the Muslim world
President Donald Trump has reached his “tear down this wall” moment.
He has a chance to add as many as 27 Muslim-majority or Muslim-plurality nations to the Abraham Accords. That achievement would not only transform the Middle East but also counter the pro-Hamas intifada gaining ground in the United States.
A wave of Accords signings would not only reshape the Middle East but also serve as the modern echo of Reagan’s challenge in Berlin 40 years ago: ‘Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.’
Twenty-one countries appear ready to sign, with another six possible candidates. Seventeen others remain unlikely for now, but shifting regional dynamics could bring them around.
A post-theocratic Iran would almost certainly reverse course, and with President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan on shaky ground, Turkey is also ripe for realignment. If those two regional powers shift, the rest would likely follow.
Creating momentum
Trump can start that domino effect the way he always has — through showmanship. A steady pace of new signings, one every few months, would keep the Accords in the headlines for the rest of his term.
Each signing should be staged as a major event: dramatic visuals, maps showing the expanding bloc, and messaging that frames the Accords as the new global mainstream.
The most significant prize would be Saudi Arabia. If Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman joins, the Saudi Islamic establishment would face enormous pressure to either endorse or remain silent. Mosques and Islamic groups worldwide that depend on Saudi support would hesitate to denounce Riyadh as apostate.
But the United States need not wait on the Saudis. The crown prince has already signaled interest. Washington can make the path warmer and quicker.
First signings
Kosovo is an obvious candidate. It quietly became an Accords partner in 2021, even pledging to open an embassy in Jerusalem. But the Muslim-majority European nation never got proper recognition. A joint signing with Egypt and Jordan — both of which already have peace treaties with Israel but have not formally joined the Accords — would spotlight Kosovo and broaden the coalition.
Azerbaijan would be another strong addition. With a Shiite-majority population and Turkic identity, it could challenge both Iran’s Shiite regime and Erdoğan’s pan-Turkic and neo-Ottoman ambitions. If Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Kyrgyzstan followed, the message would be unmistakable: Turkey’s Islamist regime does not speak for the Turkic world.
Indonesia, the world’s largest Muslim-majority nation, remains likely as well. Its late former president Abdurrahman Wahid promoted a vision much like the Accords, and his movement still carries weight.
Regional anchors
Some countries already involved carry enormous clout. Egypt, the largest Arab nation, has loudly called for modernist Islamic reform. Jordan controls Jerusalem’s holy sites, giving it symbolic weight. The United Arab Emirates is the model most young Arabs want to emulate. Morocco trains imams abroad, shaping Islamic leadership far beyond its borders.
Others, like Bahrain, Sudan, and Oman, tightly regulate Islamic preaching and will show little tolerance for clerics who denounce peace deals.
The Accords should also welcome affiliates beyond traditional borders: Iraq’s Kurdistan Regional Government, Somaliland, or even respected religious leaders like the Hebron sheikhs who want to join as a Palestinian emirate separate from the Palestinian Authority. Every addition broadens the map and amplifies momentum.
RELATED: UN showdown will decide if the Abraham Accords are built to last
Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images
Peace abroad and at home
To maximize this opportunity, Trump should appoint a special envoy with credibility in both faith and politics — someone like Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, a Syrian-American physician, veteran, and Republican congressional candidate who has long fought Islamism and built interfaith coalitions.
Expanding the Accords isn’t just foreign policy. It’s homeland security. More than 150 extremist groups in the U.S. are feeding anti-Israel narratives and stoking violence. Each new accord, amplified by a strong communications strategy, would undercut their propaganda and show that the tide runs against them.
In Riyadh in 2017, Trump declared from the heart of the Islamic world: “Drive them out!” That call now demands follow-through. A wave of Accords signings would not only reshape the Middle East but also serve as the modern echo of Reagan’s challenge in Berlin 40 years ago: “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.”
Opinion & analysis, Abraham accords, Donald trump, America first, Foreign policy, National interest, United states, Israel, Hamas, Intifada, Saudi arabia, Islam, Turkey, Recep tayyip erdogan, Islamism, Peace, United arab emirates
How Trump can dismantle far-left extremist networks
Urgency inside the Trump administration is building after the assassination of conservative icon Charlie Kirk. President Donald Trump has vowed to confront what he calls “the radical left lunatics.”
The rhetoric has grown sharper on the right, including within the administration itself. But dismantling the far left’s networks will not be simple. Defeating the forces aligned against the American republic requires more than speeches. It demands a clear understanding of the enemy and a systematic plan to dismantle enemy infrastructure using every tool of national power.
Defining terms
The biggest initial problem the Trump administration faces in confronting the radical left is a refusal by the national security, federal law enforcement, and intelligence apparatuses to even recognize who the president has identified as a threat.
Because these movements are made up of multiple entities that utilize different tactics and are organized in diverse ways, no silver bullet can defeat the far-left extremist movement.
Currently, the U.S. government refers to domestic terrorist threats in only the broadest possible categories, such as Racially or Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremist, Anti-Government/Anti-Authority Violent Extremist, Animal Rights/Environmentalist Violent Extremist, and Abortion-Related Violent Extremist. In every case, these categories are deliberately constructed to appear content-neutral. This allows the bureaucracy to appear evenhanded while selectively emphasizing preferred political targets and ignoring others.
For example, while Racially or Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremists theoretically includes both white and black supremacist groups, in practice, the government spends its efforts targeting groups that are perceived as white supremacist and underemphasizes black supremacist groups. Similarly, while the bureaucracy might claim to target Antifa and similar radical-left actors under the Anti-Government/Anti-Authority Violent Extremist category, in practice, it has emphasized investigating parents at school board meetings, “J6ers,” Catholic church attendees, and the like.
While federal law enforcement devoted 12 informants to the Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D-Mich.) kidnapping case (which collapsed at trial over questions of how much of the plot was inspired by the government itself), all evidence suggests it completely neglected to investigate the John Brown Gun Clubs, which have conducted numerous armed Antifa attacks on federal officers in multiple cities around the country.
An entirely new category
The president must direct the creation of the Far-Left Violent Extremist category and implement its immediate use across all departments and agencies. While the actual name is up for debate, it must explicitly include “anti-fascist” (Antifa), anarchist, autonomous Marxist, socialist, Marxist-Leninist, Maoist, and communist extremists and ensure that these distinctions are accurately and correctly defined.
Such an approach is not radical — in fact, it is used by American allies abroad. The German Ministry of the Interior’s Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution defines far-left extremism in precisely this way and meticulously categorizes each subcategory every year in reports that are openly available to the public.
A Far-Left Violent Extremist category should also include individuals, groups, networks, and movements based on these ideologies that utilize single-issue activism on topics like animal/environmentalist extremism and abortion as cover for their efforts. Often these apparently single-issue organizations are used as a recruiting tool to activate individuals who may be interested in a specific political topic and bring them farther into a movement whose true objective is revolution. This simple tactic alone shows the uselessness of the present set of federal categorizations.
For too long, the government, media, and academia have minimized the extensive threat posed by far-left extremists, treating it as merely examples of single-issue activism. But cases like the Black Lives Matter riots, Defend Atlanta Forest, Jane’s Revenge, and the Palestinian campus encampments have all demonstrated that for far-left extremists, changing names and logos before taking action on behalf of a changing cause is standard operating procedure. By siloing these cases in different categories, federal law enforcement fails to document — and fails to understand — the danger posed by the far left at the strategic level.
Getting the federal government to use new terminology will be a challenge. In 2021, Homeland Security insiders aggressively leaked about the first Trump administration’s attempt to require the Department of Homeland Security to use accurate terminology to describe Antifa by creating the category of Violent Antifa Anarchist Extremist. The bureaucracy vociferously rejected the effort, which effectively limited and derailed this very necessary addition.
This time the Trump administration must not be cowed.
A granular understanding of the far left is necessary to determine the appropriate response. This breakdown is vital, because such groups typically play different roles in the overall movement, largely based on their ideology and doctrine. This has been true for a century. They also organize in different structures and typically receive funding in different ways through different sources.
Anarchist and autonomist Marxists
Anarchist and autonomist Marxist networks dominate what are considered “anti-fascist” or Antifa activities. These include direct action and violent direct action such as sabotage, vandalism, doxxing, and preplanned violence, which encompasses both rioting and terrorism. They label all of American society, both mainstream conservatism and liberalism and all our public, constitutional institutions, as fascist.
Anarchist and autonomous Marxist groups are typically funded by direct crowdsourced funding, mutual aid, and local community-based fundraising. This is taken from Russian anarchist Peter Kropotkin’s theory of organizing, which is used by anarchist/socialist groups to describe how voluntary organizing provides unofficial quasi-governmental services.
In some cases, Antifa groups have fundraised by engaging in illegal activities, including the sale of drugs and prostitution. Senior members of the network may serve as protest training consultants or union organizers as part of their “day jobs.”
RELATED: If red states can’t deliver DOGE promises, what can they deliver?
Photo by michaelquirk via Getty Images
These groups are decentralized and non-hierarchical, but heavily networked through local “affinity groups,” collectives, or chapters, which are linked to similar groups primarily by ideological ties. They are not necessarily linked by financing. They also share ideological connections with similar groups and organizations that operate abroad, predominantly but not exclusively in Western Europe and Latin America.
Marxist, Marxist-Leninist, Maoist
Marxist, Marxist-Leninist, Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, and other communist organizations typically create and proliferate structures as mass-movement organizations. They think and act with greater strategic purpose than the anarchists and autonomous Marxists and maintain systems of command and control. Their networks predominate in the indoctrination and organizational space, creating overlapping networks of community organizations, front groups, and other structures.
Additionally, they co-opt independent entities. Through their controlled organizations and those they infiltrate, they organize large-scale protests and disruptions under a variety of issues and labels. Whether controlled outright or dominated through disciplined infiltrators in key positions of authority, they can range from small, local, and niche to broad-based and national mass organizations. These groups are the most likely of all far-left extremists to have access to fiscal sponsorship organizations through which they can access significant amounts of donor funds from progressive tax-free foundations.
These vertically integrated organizations and networks are also more likely to have operational ties to foreign governments and foreign communist parties. Examples include the much-discussed Party for Socialism and Liberation’s ties to the Chinese Communist Party and groups like the Freedom Road Socialist Organization, which is extensively networked with other communist parties such as those in China and Cuba.
They may also have ties to communist organizations designated as terrorist groups, including the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Hamas, and the Communist Party of the Philippines/New People’s Army. Others may have ties to sanctioned governments, including Russia, Venezuela, Iran, and North Korea.
Like the anarchists and autonomous Marxists, these groups have ideological and doctrinal differences. They compete with each other for attention, funds, and recruits. Nonetheless, they effectively interact and coordinate through the use of the concepts of “diversity of tactics” and “popular fronts.” Like an orchestra, these groups play their own separate parts, but they have the effect of coming together as a functioning, cohesive whole. They generally accomplish this despite lacking a single entity that directs and coordinates the operation or campaign.
Defeating far-left extremism
Because these movements are made up of multiple entities that utilize different tactics and are organized in diverse ways, no silver bullet can defeat the far-left extremist movement. Only a whole-of-government — and ultimately a whole-of-society — approach will be successful. Anyone who insists on a single, easy method for stopping this threat is at best ill informed.
Department of Justice
The Department of Justice would presumably serve as the lead agency in any effort. Federal counterterrorism authorities may be needed to address one element of the far-left extremist network. Counterintelligence authorities, working through an entirely different set of statutes, may be necessary to pursue those individuals and groups linked to foreign entities that are facilitating subversion and those advocating, but not actually committing, violent crimes or terrorism.
Legal authorities addressing racketeering, money laundering, charity fraud, and other white-collar crimes may be the best legal instruments in other cases. (Charity fraud investigations against far-left extremist organizations have already played a key role in Georgia and Virginia.) Civil rights enforcement is likely necessary in different situations.
Finally, the implementation of statutes housed under Title 18, Chapter 115 of the U.S. Code that are aimed at groups engaged in seditious conspiracy or direct advocacy of the overthrow of the U.S. government and Constitution may ultimately prove necessary. This option is likely to provoke an aggressive legal challenge, as these statutes have been largely moribund since a series of Supreme Court decisions beginning in 1957, but such a challenge may be desirable. A legal strategy specifically focused on reviving these authorities can select favorable test cases to advance case law.
The Department of Justice should also consider pursuing material support or accessory charges against crowdfunding websites or organizations that flagrantly and negligently assist Antifa groups in raising funds for items or materials used in the commission of terrorist or criminal acts. These may include crowdfunding for potential weapons, armor, shields, face masks, or the cash needed to keep the extremists viable and active.
The Department of Justice should work closely with state and local governments to ensure the toughest convictions possible. State and local jurisdictions may have statutes that are more comprehensive and advanced than the federal government.
A coordinated whole-of-government approach is absolutely necessary to defeat far-left extremism.
The Trump administration should advocate for state governments to extensively cooperate with federal law enforcement and direct federal task force officers to utilize state terrorism, racketeering, sabotage, gang designations, or sedition laws where these might be the most appropriate option.
A coordinated whole-of-government approach is absolutely necessary, preferably directed by a task force at the presidential level, as it would be empowered to utilize any and all appropriate statutes and authorities and properly resourced by representatives from all applicable agencies.
Office of the Director of National Intelligence
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence should produce classified and unclassified national intelligence products on far-left extremism, at both the national and international levels, that highlight extensive evidence of transnational cooperation. Intelligence authorities need to coordinate to identify foreign ties to domestic far-left extremist groups. ODNI should also investigate, and include in its reporting, the role played by foreign adversaries in supporting U.S.-based far-left extremist groups.
The director of national intelligence should authorize a “Team B” competitive analytical exercise composed of independent, outside experts on far-left extremism to allow independent review of materials and methodology and provide alternative analysis. This approach would force competition within the intelligence community and assist it in reassessing and ameliorating its own shortcomings.
State Department and Treasury Department
The State Department should instruct consular officials to thoroughly investigate visa applicants and strictly enforce inadmissibility under Title 8, Chapter 12, §1182 (a)(3)(B) or (3)(D) of the U.S. Code (overthrow of the U.S. government, terrorist activities, or membership in totalitarian parties).
Participation in any anarchist or Marxist party or organization should be considered de facto grounds for permanent inadmissibility. Current visa holders involved with any far-left extremist group or who demonstrate support for such groups should have their visas revoked.
The State Department should also utilize multilateral fora developed for countering violent extremism to create a far-left extremism working group. It should work with foreign counterparts to identify foreign far-left terrorist groups and associated networks to be designated, specifically including Antifa groups.
One example is Germany’s Hammerbande, which has conducted a number of attacks across international borders but whose members were successfully prosecuted in Germany. Other options for relatively straightforward far-left extremist terrorist designations include several Greek Antifa/anarchist terrorist groups. A more aggressive option might include designating Palestine Action, a group recently banned in the United Kingdom for attacking a Royal Air Force base, as a far-left extremist group.
The United States should utilize diplomatic efforts and leverage where necessary to urge foreign partners that do not recognize far-left extremism to do so. These include the other four members of the Five Eyes: principal U.S. intelligence partners Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, whose intelligence and security services have also faced challenges with politicization.
The Treasury Department should pursue designation of international Antifa structures that provide material support for any such designated organizations, such as Antifa International and the International Anti-Fascist Defense Fund, and pursue secondary designations where applicable.
While the State and Treasury Departments may pursue a direct foreign terrorism designation for Antifa as a whole, this approach is likely to face significant legal challenges and risk being underutilized. A piecemeal approach will be slower, but it will be more likely to survive strong bureaucratic inertia.
The State and Treasury Departments should also aggressively pursue secondary designation for groups providing material support for the Communist Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and its front organization, Samidoun, and front organizations supporting the Communist Party of the Philippines/New People’s Army. In some cases, groups facing secondary sanctions may be U.S.-based organizations or include U.S. nationals.
Department of Homeland Security
In consultation with experts on far-left extremism, the Department of Homeland Security should produce intelligence products for all federal, state, local, and tribal partners on identifying far-left extremist individuals and organizations.
The department should conduct an extensive review of information produced by partner fusion centers to determine whether reporting on potential far-left extremism has been appropriately analyzed and acted upon. Anecdotal reports suggest that federal partners have historically disproportionately ignored or disregarded reporting from state fusion centers related to far-left extremism as compared to other types of extremist ideology.
The homeland security secretary should direct the Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention Grant Program to set aside funds specifically to support future research into the threat of far-left extremism. Because of the high number of far-left extremists who are affiliated with academia, the administration must carefully observe this program to ensure that the ultimate recipients of any grant have a demonstrated history of research on far-left extremism — but are not themselves ideologically aligned with the movement.
RELATED: Homeland Security expert details step-by-step plan to label Antifa a terrorist group
Photo by Matteo Della Torre/NurPhoto via Getty Images
Previous recipients of funds under this program have engaged in a strategic minimization, and even outright denial, of the threat of far-left extremism; in some cases, grant recipients appeared to have engaged in Antifa activities themselves. Organizations in which these and like activities occur should see their grants revoked.
The Department of Homeland Security should also conduct a review of its own interactions with individuals who are professed anti-fascists and have been utilized as supposed experts.
Internal Revenue Service
Far-left extremist groups and their benefactors regularly abuse Internal Revenue Service practices related to tax-free nonprofit organizations, including the wide-scale abuse of fiscal sponsorship arrangements. A fiscal sponsor can be held legally responsible for the activities of the entity it sponsors, which has no legal status apart from serving as a project of its sponsor if those are not tax-deductible.
Nonprofit organizations credibly linked to criminal activity should have their tax-free status revoked. The agency should be instructed to review its ruling on the use of fiscal sponsorships to prevent further abuse and should refer individuals for prosecution who are engaged in utilizing tax-deductible funds for far-left extremist activity.
Department of Labor
The Labor Department should be instructed to aggressively enforce Section 540 of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, which prohibits persons who are convicted of certain crimes (including misdemeanors) from serving as a union official, employee, or consultant. This is particularly important, as far-left extremists are often engaged as union organizers or protest training consultants.
The administration may consider seeking an amendment to the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act to ban those convicted of specific crimes that are commonly conducted by far-left extremists, including (but not limited to) felony federal rioting. The U.S. must ensure that all federal employee unions are appropriately scrutinized and, if necessary, penalized or prosecuted for any far-left extremist activities by union members and leaders.
As part of the broad Justice Department legal strategy to revisit enforcement of U.S. statutory prohibitions against advocacy for overthrowing the United States, Labor should consider developing a legal strategy to revisit United States v. Brown, where the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that open Communist Party members could not be prohibited from holding positions in labor unions.
Department of War
As has been demonstrated following the assassination of Charlie Kirk, literally thousands of War Department personnel have been identified as countenancing political violence against conservatives. During the department-wide “extremism stand-down” promoted by then-Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, it failed to educate its personnel on the signs and dangers of far-left extremism, choosing to focus solely on perceived white supremacist and right-wing extremism.
This occurred despite a Rand Corporation survey that showed Antifa with the highest support among military veterans of any extremist ideology other than the conspiracy theory “QAnon.” Antifa had more than five times as much support among veterans as white supremacist ideology. The secretary of war should order a full review of all insider threat materials and extremist training materials, ensuring they accurately reflect the threat posed by far-left extremism.
Finally, national defense universities, military academies, postgraduate schools, and other military education entities and programs should be encouraged to create coursework and hire professors and instructors who are capable of providing warfighters and national security leadership with a quality education in the nature of far-left extremism.
Department of Education
Examples of far-left extremism openly promoted in federally funded institutions of higher education are rife, as well as in public K-12 education. Scores, if not hundreds, of examples of both college and university professors and K-12 public school educators show open promotion of far-left extremism. In many cases, radical teachers’ unions produce training and educational materials for use in the classroom.
Some states have attempted to counter this ongoing effort by educating students about the history and crimes of communism, helping them resist indoctrination and radicalization to such ideologies. The Trump administration should require states to promote appropriate educational materials if they wish to receive Department of Education funds.
The department may also investigate the plausibility of creating grants for research into far-left extremism, while carefully vetting to ensure that such grants do not go to extremists themselves.
Whole-of-society approach
In addition to these efforts, the Trump administration will need to utilize rhetoric and the bully pulpit to help rally Americans around our shared political principles. The president should publicly and repeatedly support and praise Democrat officials at any level of government who publicly stand against far-left extremism.
The goal of the far-left extremist network over the past five years has been to encourage mainstream Democrat elected officials and media figures to utilize their rhetoric. Mainstream Democrats increasingly rely upon far-left extremist networks for political organizing and campaign activity.
The president should also urge his supporters and political donors to bolster private-sector efforts to support independent research, study, and action concerning the threat of far-left extremism. Since Sept. 11, 2001, the academic field of “countering violent extremism” has undergone a rapid expansion. Yet in almost no cases do grants, chairs, or departments exist that focus solely on the study of far-left extremism. This leaves law enforcement and intelligence officials under-resourced and with limited access to credentialed experts on these issues.
The Trump administration has demonstrated the political will to take the fight to far-left extremism, but there will be no shortcuts or quick fixes in this fight.
Now, the hard work must begin.
Editor’s note: This article was originally published at the American Mind.
Opinion & analysis, Opinion, Far-left extremist, Far-left extremism, Radical left, Defeating radical left
My parents ‘arranged my marriage’ at 16; maybe I should have taken them up on it
I met Natalie Carlson at a big Christmas party for my dad’s clinic. It was in a big house. Everyone was dressed up. I was 16.
There was a roaring fire, a big Christmas tree, and a basement where the younger kids could play pool.
During my 20s, I went through a nightclub phase. Hanging out in clubs, I encountered very few cheerful women with bright faces and plaid skirts.
Natalie was the daughter of one of my dad’s colleagues. She had long dark hair and wore a plaid skirt. My memory is that she was cheerful, smart, fun to talk to.
Since our fathers were both doctors, our lives were somewhat similar. We had a lot to talk about. We had other things in common as well. We were both good students. We were both looking forward to college.
A week later, at dinner, my parents informed me that a marriage had been arranged between Natalie and me. They laughed when they told me this. It was a joke, of course.
My parents had run into Natalie’s parents, and everyone agreed how comfortable we looked together and that we’d be a perfect match.
A dowry and an exchange of goats had been decided on. Everyone thought this was very funny.
First date (or lack thereof)
Not long after that, in a quieter moment, my mother actually suggested I contact Natalie. Maybe she would want to get together.
I wasn’t totally against this idea. In fact, I was excited by it. I hadn’t really thought about going on “a date” with Natalie. But now that I had, it seemed like a good idea.
Unfortunately, there were logistical problems. She went to a different high school. She had her own friends. I didn’t have a car. I was too shy to call her.
I mean, I liked girls. I’d had girlfriends. But I didn’t have to arrange “dates” with them. We just ended up together. Through school. We’d meet up at dances or beer parties.
The idea of going on an official date with a girl … a girl I met through my parents … that seemed too weird. And not natural. And like too much pressure. So I never got around to calling Natalie.
Lingering dreams of love
Still, this idea of Natalie and me lingered within my family. Natalie continued to come up in family conversations. When she did, everyone at the dinner table would look in my direction. It wasn’t an inside joke exactly. It was just something we were all aware of. My parents seemed almost wistful at the thought of it.
Oddly enough, I was wistful too. I have a very clear memory — one of the most vivid of my youth — of walking across the front lawn of my high school and imagining myself, years in the future, with Natalie Carlson as my wife.
What a calming, comfortable thought this was! Having this decision made for me, having the choice of a female companion removed from my troubled adolescent brain and put safely in the hands of responsible adults. Who else would know better what was best for us?
‘Free Bird’
Perhaps I sensed, even then, that an early marriage to someone like Natalie was my best chance for a sane, reasonable life.
Natalie was an attractive, intelligent, good-natured person. How many girls like her would I come across in the future?
Of course, being a teenager, I assumed the answer was: a lot. Millions. An unlimited amount.
Which is why I didn’t need to get married young. I could put it off. Live a little first. And how did I know I would even like being married? I was into Led Zeppelin and Aerosmith. And punk rock. None of my musical heroes was advocating the joys of marriage.
Quite the opposite. Being single and free, that was the best life. Just ask Lynyrd Skynyrd!
Besides which, I had ideas of becoming a writer. Wouldn’t marriage get in the way of that?
Men going their own way
And so, conforming to the norms of the late 20th century, I did not marry Natalie, or even speak to her again. I continued with my life, following my own tastes and inclinations and not my parents.
The girls I socialized with for the remainder of high school were mostly upper-middle class, intelligent, college-bound. Much like Natalie. They drove Volkswagen Rabbits and took Advanced Placement classes. They went to nice suburban high schools like the one I went to.
At college, the idea of marriage was even more frowned upon than it had been in high school. The women at my college were there to start their own lives, their own careers. They weren’t looking for husbands, like the women of my parents’ generation.
As college progressed, I played in bands and lived an increasingly rebellious and dissolute lifestyle. I began to gravitate toward more dramatic girls, young women who were prone to dark moods, who drank and did drugs.
During my 20s, I went through a nightclub phase. Hanging out in clubs, I encountered very few cheerful women with bright faces and plaid skirts.
In my 30s, I calmed down a bit and eventually established myself as a writer. But that was not particularly conducive to stable relationships either.
Also, my “wild years” had extended a decade longer than most people’s, and this had left its mark. I was still an intelligent, college-educated person. But I was pretty rough around the edges.
By the time I was in my late 30s, even if I did come across a Natalie Carlson, I wouldn’t have known what to do with her. Nor would she have known what to do with me.
Marriage, at last
At 44, I finally tried my hand at marriage. It was a risky match, to a complicated person. Not surprisingly, it didn’t last.
But I learned something important from the attempt: that the actual state of being married was not nearly as constrictive as I’d imagined. Even for an undomesticated person like myself, married life was full of subtle joys and small comforts.
When this first attempt failed, I assumed I would marry again, now that I understood the institution’s many benefits.
But that didn’t happen. Maybe I waited too long. Maybe I was too comfortable being on my own.
In my own defense, I had grown up in a time in American history when married life, family life were not valued very much. It was uncool. It was boring. It was oppressive. It was the mistake your parents made.
Other people — smarter people than me — ignored this cultural messaging and started families anyway. I did not.
RELATED: Weddings cost money. Marriage costs everything.
Photo by Amy Humphries/Getty Images
Nostalgia for Natalie
And so I sometimes find myself thinking of Natalie Carlson. Sweet, enthusiastic, 16-year-old Natalie. With her smiling face and plaid skirt. What if that arranged marriage had actually happened?
It’s a pretty intriguing idea. If we’d been born in a different time, in a different culture, she might be in the other room right now as I write this. With her graying hair piled on her head and her feet up, sipping a cup of tea.
We’d have grown kids by now. They’d be off at college, or beginning their careers, or starting families of their own. If they happened to call, we would both hover over the speakerphone, eager to hear their voices.
Would I trade that life for what I have now? I might.
From what I can tell, marriage is not so much a process of finding the perfect person. It’s more of a process of growing into each other over time. Which probably works better if you start early.
And it probably wouldn’t hurt to get some input from elsewhere. From someone who knows you. Like your parents.
Marriage, Arranged marriages, Wedding, Lifestyle, Men and women, Dating, Nuptial miss
Man who stabbed elderly victim in the neck until he died had targeted him because he was a pedophile, police say
A California man meticulously planned a lethal attack on a convicted sex offender whose address he found on a sex offender registry, according to police.
Varun Suresh, 29, of Fremont was arrested on Thursday after he allegedly chased down 71-year-old David Brimmer to his neighbor’s house, where he stabbed Brimmer in the neck until the man died, said court documents reported by KTVU-TV.
Suresh told police he saw blood pouring from Brimmer’s neck and he told him, ‘It’s over; you have to repent.’
Suresh allegedly told police that he wanted to attack a pedophile, and he found Brimmer’s address on the California Megan’s Law website.
Police said they obtained screenshots from the man’s phone from the website of several registered sex offenders, including Brimmer, about 45 minutes before they received emergency calls about the stabbing at about 11:57 a.m.
Brimmer served about nine years in prison over a conviction in 1995 of committing lewd and lascivious acts with a child.
Suresh pretended to be an accountant going door-to-door in Brimmer’s neighborhood looking for new clients in order to ensure that Brimmer did not suspect him of wanting to do him harm. When Brimmer opened his door to Suresh, he pretended to be non-threatening until confirming he had identified the right man.
“That’s when we both knew it was on,” Suresh told police.
Suresh grabbed at Brimmer and tried to get inside his home, but the man pushed past Suresh and ran down the street. He tried to flag down a vehicle but was unsuccessful.
Brimmer then ran into an open garage two houses away and pounded on the door asking for help until the neighbor opened the door. Suresh pushed through the door as well and followed Brimmer into the kitchen where he stabbed the man in the neck.
Suresh told police he saw blood pouring from Brimmer’s neck and he told him, “It’s over; you have to repent.”
Brimmer ran out of the home and collapsed in the yard, where Suresh pinned him down and stabbed him in the neck several more times and then slit his throat.
RELATED: Man hacked off victim’s head with machete while his wife and child watched, police say
Suresh told police he didn’t intend to get away with the crime.
“I’m hoping that because [the victim is] a pedophile … like, everyone hates pedophiles … so, like, it should be cool. It should be cool,” he said.
He also did not express any remorse about his actions and said that the killing was “honestly really fun.”
Suresh was previously charged in 2021 for making a false bomb threat and told police he was hunting the CEO of Hyatt Hotels because he believed he was a pedophile, according to KTVU.
Police said they recovered a knife at the scene. Suresh was charged with murder.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Varun suresh, David brimmer murdered, Vigilante justice, Offender registry murder, Crime
What if Johnny Carson turned MLK’s murder into a punch line?
What if, in 1968, after the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., Johnny Carson opened “The Tonight Show” with jibes about how one of King’s own supporters had pulled the trigger? What if he followed with a gag suggesting that President Lyndon Johnson didn’t care much about losing a friend? Or how maybe we need to keep up the pressure on conservatives who think free speech includes engaging those who disagree with them in civil dialogue?
Does anyone believe NBC executives would have shrugged and said, “Let Johnny talk — free speech, you know”? Does anyone think Carson’s 12 million nightly viewers would have treated it as harmless banter and tuned in the next night with curiosity about what he might say next?
Jimmy Kimmel needs to ‘grow a pair,’ take his lumps, and find another venue.
When the members of the first Congress wrote the First Amendment, enshrining freedom of speech, they did it within the context of the words of John Adams: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
St. Paul puts it this way: “‘I have the right to do anything,’ you say — but not everything is beneficial. ‘I have the right to do anything’ — but I will not be mastered by anything” (1 Corinthians 6:12).
Sadly, I was included in an email from a dear relative who chided anyone who did not protest Jimmy Kimmel’s firing, citing the First Amendment. My relative felt very strongly about this. In his own words, if you didn’t loudly defend Kimmel, you needed to “grow a pair.”
My wife and I had just finished watching the entire eight-hour-long, beautiful, uplifting, and spirit-filled memorial service for Charlie Kirk. Before I went to sleep, I decided to clear out my email inbox for the day. Unfortunately, I opened the email from my relative (thinking it was just the usual newsy missive) and read his thoughts.
He had written his opinions before the service, so I am not sure if he would have sent the same message; he made it clear that what happened to Charlie was certainly serious and evil.
No buts about it
My relative used words I had heard before from those who want to virtue signal, while also insisting that doing bad things is not acceptable. It was a variation of this: Yes, what happened to Charlie Kirk was wrong, terrible! But …
If you hear people on the left — or even people who consider themselves rational, reasonable people “in the middle” who like to play the both-sides-are-wrong card — you need to push back. Comparing the temporary suspension of a mediocre, inconsequential talent like Kimmel to the assassination of a beautiful, influential man like Kirk — well, they are not in the same arena.
Since I was the only one on the email thread who knew Charlie personally (we had been colleagues at Salem Radio), I felt my comments would carry more weight.
I highlighted the Martin Luther King Jr.–Carson comparison and then focused on the “free speech” aspect from a purely business standpoint.
Jimmy Kimmel loses tens of millions of dollars for the network annually. It’s been said that his viewership was so low that if you posted a video on X of your cat playing the piano, you could attract more viewers than Kimmel gets on any given night.
Moreover, the claim that Kimmel was denied his First Amendment rights is simply untrue. Kimmel remains free to say whatever he wants anywhere else. For example, when Tucker Carlson (who had the hottest show on Fox, making millions for the network) was canceled for speaking the truth politically, he launched his own “network.”
The funny thing is (no, not jokes from Kimmel’s opening monologues), unsuccessful shows hosted by people with varying degrees of talent get canceled all the time in the world of television. If that were not so, we would all be subjected to the 59th season of “My Mother the Car,” starring Jerry Van Dyke.
RELATED: I experienced Jimmy Kimmel’s lies firsthand. His suspension is justice.
Photo by Tommaso Boddi/Getty Images for UCLA Jonsson Cancer Center Foundation
Lackluster shows are replaced by something for which the viewing public actually cares to tune in. The public had clearly tuned out of Kimmel’s show a long time ago.
What Jimmy Kimmel needs to do is “grow a pair,” take his lumps, and find another venue. Nevertheless, Kimmel has (viola!) returned after all, because I suppose the network figures it still hasn’t lost enough money — or influence.
Prove Him wrong
Young Charlie Kirk paid the ultimate price for standing against the obvious evil he saw in plain sight. And in the days, weeks, months, and years ahead, many more, unfortunately, may join him.
My relative closed out his email challenging those of us who didn’t agree with him to respond à la Charlie: “Prove me wrong,” he wrote.
I closed my email response to him in a way I think the humble Charlie Kirk might have done: “Jesus said, ‘I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me’” (John 14:6).
“Prove Him wrong.”
Opinion & analysis, Free speech, First amendment, Jimmy kimmel, Abc, Late night, Comedy, Lies, Apology, Jesus christ, Christianity, Forgiveness, John adams, Charlie kirk, Evil, Apostle paul, Religion, Morality
Pregnant libs film themselves taking Tylenol in latest display of Trump derangement syndrome
On September 22, President Donald Trump announced at the White House, alongside Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and CMS Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz, that the FDA would notify physicians of a possible association between acetaminophen use during pregnancy and increased risk of autism in children, and would begin updating safety labeling for acetaminophen products, most notably Tylenol. Trump stated that pregnant women should limit acetaminophen to cases of high fever only and avoid giving it to babies, citing skyrocketing autism rates (now 1 in 31 U.S. children).
This warning came after HHS, FDA, and NIH reviewed dozens of existing high-profile studies by established researchers, who found a probable association between acetaminophen use during pregnancy and autism in children.
Immediately following this announcement, however, several pregnant liberals took to social media and filmed themselves taking Tylenol.
This is “example 4,055,400” of “liberal, mentally ill white women just being absolutely bats**t crazy. Now they are actively going against the recommendations of the scientific community because orange man bad,” says Sara Gonzales, who played some of these viral clips on a recent episode of her show.
In the first clip, a white pregnant woman films herself taking Tylenol. The caption reads: “Here’s is me, a PREGNANT woman, taking TYLENOL because I believe in science and not someone who has no medical background.”
In the second clip, another pregnant woman, using a rainbow flashing filter, films herself taking Tylenol while dancing, with the caption: “How I’m taking Tylenol after Trump’s ‘big announcement.’”
“So these people are hearing from the scientific community that you might be harming your baby, and they’re taking it anyway. That’s deranged. Abuse your baby to own the cons, right? Like, this is crazy,” Sara says.
In the same press conference, President Trump also addressed vaccines, reiterating a potential link to autism. He suggested additives like heavy metals may be a factor and recommended spacing out childhood shots over years rather than bundling them. RFK Jr. referenced suppressed research on vaccine-autism ties, vowing to continue researching the potential link.
“The fact that we have a presidential administration that is saying these things is the biggest advancement on MAHA and vaccines of any presidential administration,” Sara says.
“I have real hope. And what I saw [during Monday’s press conference] was an administration who absolutely understands what is really going on, who absolutely understands what is at play here, and who is ready to do the work.”
To the crazy liberal women suffering from Trump derangement syndrome, Sara says: “Oh man, you really owned Donald Trump. I mean, you could be harming your fetus, but let’s be real. You might just abort it later anyway.”
To hear more of her commentary and see the video clips, watch the episode above.
Want more from Sara Gonzales?
To enjoy more of Sara’s no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Sara gonzales, Sara gonzales unfiltered, Blazetv, Blaze media, Tylenol, Autism, Tylenol autism, Trump, Hhs, Rfk jr
Violence gave Jimmy Kimmel his job back
Last week, ABC late-night host Jimmy Kimmel told a big lie on national television. He claimed Charlie Kirk had been assassinated by a conservative MAGA supporter. This wasn’t a bad joke — it was a deliberate attempt to cover for left-wing violence and deceive millions of people.
After a campaign pressuring advertisers and affiliates, ABC suspended Kimmel, saying he wouldn’t immediately return to the air. Progressives screamed about “cancel culture” and circulated petitions, apparently more concerned about a millionaire losing his low-rated show than about a murdered father.
The right, paralyzed by fear of bad press, has given the left a free pass. That timidity has only encouraged more bloodshed.
Then came the threats. Violent warnings poured into ABC affiliates, culminating in a leftist shooting up a station in Sacramento. Shortly afterward, ABC announced that Kimmel would return to the air. The lesson for the left was simple: Violence and terrorism work.
The Trump moment
When Donald Trump was shot on stage in Butler, Pennsylvania, last year, the entire world held its breath. His supporters didn’t flee; they froze, waiting to see if their leader had been killed. If a leftist assassin had succeeded, civil war was on the table. Then Trump stood and raised a defiant fist, and the nation exhaled. Not only because he had survived, but because the darkest path had been narrowly avoided.
That moment should have been a turning point. Trump entered office with energy, issuing a flurry of executive orders. But he never confronted the left-wing groups and the institutions that had normalized violence. He wanted a stable economy and secure borders, but left-wing radicals continued to act as if they had a special right to political violence. By letting them get away with assassination attempts and street terror, Trump ensured that another wave was inevitable.
Excuses and celebrations
After Kirk’s assassination on Sept. 10, some progressives mouthed words about lowering the temperature. Almost all of them hedged by smearing the victim or blaming “both sides.” Meanwhile, a disturbingly large faction openly celebrated the murder. Their message was clear: They would never abandon violence as long as it kept paying dividends.
Even Kimmel’s brief firing — for telling a malicious lie that threatened ABC’s broadcast license — was more than they could tolerate. For perspective: When an unknown addict overdosed while in police custody, the left torched American cities for months. In contrast, a prominent conservative was assassinated, and the only cost extracted from the left was one failing talk show host and some TikTok blabbermouths losing their jobs. Even that tiny price triggered outrage.
Violence pays
When FCC Chair Brendan Carr flagged Kimmel’s violation, progressives shrieked about “fascism” and “the end of free speech.” The irony was grotesque: Kirk had just been killed for exercising his free speech.
Meanwhile, major Democrats piled on. Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) smeared Kirk’s character before he was buried. Keith Olbermann threatened to kill CNN commentator Scott Jennings before issuing a flimsy apology. Left-wing influencers rushed to declare allegiance to Antifa, a group with a long record of violence. Whatever pretense of unity had existed collapsed in less than 24 hours.
Soon threats flooded ABC affiliates. One man — a former teachers’ union lawyer! — even sprayed bullets into a station window. That was enough for Sinclair Media, ABC’s largest affiliate group, to pull a planned Kirk tribute and restore late-night programming. ABC then confirmed that Kimmel himself would return in that slot. The terrorists had won.
A partial retreat
Credit where due: After another wave of pressure, Sinclair and Nexstar, another major affiliate group, refused to air Kimmel until he apologized. Together they represent about 70 of ABC’s 250 affiliates, including major markets such as Washington, Seattle, and Portland. That is significant — but still insufficient.
Reports indicate that Kimmel could have resolved the issue early simply by apologizing. He refused. He bet that his Hollywood allies and violent extremists would clear a path for his return. He was right.
RELATED: I experienced Jimmy Kimmel’s lies firsthand. His suspension is justice.
Photo by Randy Holmes/Disney via Getty Images
Incentives matter
Every parent knows what happens if you don’t punish bad behavior: It repeats and often escalates. The same holds true in politics. When the left sees it can assault conservative speakers, burn cities, threaten opponents, shoot presidents, assassinate leaders, and face no serious consequences, it learns the obvious lesson: Violence works.
The right, paralyzed by fear of bad press, has given the left a free pass. That timidity has only encouraged more bloodshed.
Now Trump has signed an executive order declaring Antifa a terrorist organization. JD Vance and Stephen Miller have pledged to dismantle the networks funding leftist extremism. That is overdue but necessary. If justice is not swift and severe, the killings will continue — because the killers believe they are entitled to keep winning.
Opinion & analysis, Jimmy kimmel, Abc, Nexstar, Donald trump, Charlie kirk assassination, Maga, Lies, Freedom of speech, Free speech, Censorship, First amendment, Violence, Shooting, Sacramento, Teachers unions, Protests, Terrorism, Sinclair
Justice Department preparing to seek indictment against James Comey: MSNBC
An MSNBC report said the Department of Justice is preparing to ask a grand jury to indict James Comey for allegedly lying in testimony to Congress.
The report claimed that two sources at the DOJ and a person familiar with the matter confirmed the development against the former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The investigation is being conducted by prosecutors at the the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Virginia’s eastern district.
The five-year statute of limitations on the expected charge will lapse on Tuesday.
“There are still internal matters being sorted out,” one of the officials is quoted as saying.
The extent of the charges is unclear, but one source said they appear to be related to testimony to Congress he made in Sept. 2020 about a leak of information to the Wall Street Journal. The Journal article was a report on the email scandal related to Hillary Clinton, who was a presidential candidate at the time.
The report notes that the five-year statute of limitations on the expected charge will lapse on Tuesday.
A spokesperson for the DOJ declined to comment on any matter regarding Comey.
On Saturday, President Donald Trump posted a message on social media to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi demanding that she take action against Comey and other political opponents. He said that the delay in filing charges was damaging to the administration’s reputation and credibility.
“I have reviewed over 30 statements and posts saying that, essentially, ‘same old story as last time, all talk, no action. Nothing is being done,'” he wrote.
Comey has maintained his innocence. CNN said he did not respond to requests for comment about the report.
In May, Comey caused a stir when he posted an image of a seashell arrangement from the beach that many took to be a veiled threat against the president. He later deleted the post and apologized but was visited by FBI agents investigating the incident.
“He knew exactly what that meant. A child knows what that meant. If you’re the FBI director and you don’t know what that meant? That meant assassination,” the president responded.
“Now, he wasn’t very competent, but he was competent enough to know what that meant, and he did it for a reason. And he was hit so hard because people like me, and they like what’s happening with our country,” Trump added.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Doj indicts comey, James comey, Trump vs comey, Comey lies, Politics
Erika Kirk forgives, Trump fights evil — Scripture says both are right
During her powerful speech at Charlie Kirk’s memorial service last Sunday, Erika Kirk, Charlie’s widow and the new CEO of Turning Point USA, did what most people wouldn’t have the strength to do: She forgave her husband’s murderer.
“That young man, I forgive him,” she said through tears and evident pain.
Since then, many have complained that some of the speeches from Trump administration officials contradicted Erika’s stunning act of Christ-like forgiveness.
For example, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller delivered a powerful speech, vowing to “prevail over the forces of wickedness and evil.”
President Trump in his speech admitted that he is not like Charlie when it comes to loving his enemies. “That’s where I disagreed with Charlie. I hate my opponent. I hate what they’ve done to our country. I hate what they’ve done to our people. And I don’t want the best for them,” he said bluntly.
But Allie Beth Stuckey, who guest hosted “The Charlie Kirk Show” yesterday at his Phoenix studio, says that Erika’s forgiveness and the government’s vow to crush evil aren’t oppositional at all. In fact, they’re perfectly aligned with Scripture.
“[Forgiveness and justice] both exist. Government punishes evil. We forgive,” Allie explains.
“When Jesus is talking about ‘turn the other cheek,’ he’s talking about our interpersonal relationships. He is not negating the government’s role in executing justice,” she adds.
She then cites Romans 13: 1-3, which reads, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad.”
“And so, it is not the government’s job to give grace and to forgive,” Allie says. “Not to say that there’s no place for legal mercy in our system at all, but the government, who is tasked at protecting the most vulnerable … has to punish evil.”
“God is a God of order. We see that from the very beginning that He placed us not in a jungle but in a garden. … And we see His ordering of things throughout creation and throughout Scripture, and the government is part of that order.”
To hear more of Allie’s commentary, watch the clip above.
Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?
To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Relatable with allie beth stuckey, Allie beth stuckey, Charlie kirk, Erika kirk, Stephen miller, Donald trump, Turning point usa, Tpusa, The charlie kirk show, Blazetv, Blaze media, Relatable
Nexstar keeps Kimmel off the air despite Elizabeth Warren’s incessant whining
Disney’s ABC may not have the stomach or the desire to stand up to the liberal mob, but there evidently remain some organizations that do.
Nexstar Media Group — a Texas-headquartered media company that owns hundreds of televisions stations, including 32 stations affiliated with Disney’s ABC television network — infuriated liberals on Sept. 17 with its announcement that it would cease carrying “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” for the foreseeable future.
‘This censorship of Kimmel reeks of corruption.’
Nexstar, like the Sinclair Broadcast Group, which similarly pre-empted the poorly performing show, cited as cause Kimmel’s desperate attempt to suggest that the homosexual leftist arrested for allegedly assassinating Charlie Kirk supported MAGA.
“We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them, and doing everything they can to score political points from it,” Kimmel said on September 15.
While ABC subsequently announced that it was suspending the show, it caved amid backlash from Hollywood script readers, Democrats, and liberal activists. Nexstar and Sinclair, however, stood their ground, prompting even more apoplexy on the left.
RELATED: ‘Rest in peace, wheezy’: Jimmy Kimmel’s legacy of late-night demonization and hatred
Photo by David Russell/Disney via Getty Images
Several hours after Nexstar announced on Tuesday that it was standing by its initial decision “pending assurance that all parties are committed to fostering an environment of respectful, constructive dialogue in the markets we serve,” Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren claimed that the company’s programming decision constituted censorship.
The failed presidential candidate tweeted, “Two companies — Nexstar and Sinclair — control hundreds of local TV stations and have business deals pending Donald Trump’s approval. They won’t air Kimmel tonight.”
Warren insinuated that Nexstar is trying to appease President Donald Trump and his allies to ensure that its planned $6.2 billion purchase of Tegna, a competitor that owns 13 ABC affiliate stations, receives approval from the Federal Communications Commission.
“This censorship of Kimmel reeks of corruption,” Warren said.
Democratic Sens. Ed Markey (Mass.), Chris Van Hollen (Md.), and Ron Wyden (Ore.) joined Warren in penning a letter to both Perry Sook, chairman of Nexstar, and Sinclair CEO Christopher Ripley on Tuesday, whining about the companies’ decision to take Kimmel’s show off the air.
“If you suspended a late-night comedian’s show in part to seek regulatory favors from the administration, you have not only assisted the administration in eroding First Amendment freedoms but also create the appearance of a possible quid-pro-quo arrangement that could implicate federal anti-corruption laws,” the Democrats’ letter reads.
“If Nexstar or Sinclair traded the censorship of a critic of the administration for official acts by the Trump administration, your companies are not only complicit in an alarming trampling of free speech rights but also risk running afoul of federal law,” the letter continues.
The Democratic lawmakers’ concern-mongering wasn’t enough to make Nexstar fall in line.
In a statement shared with Blaze News early Wednesday afternoon, the company noted, “Nexstar is continuing to evaluate the status of ‘Jimmy Kimmel Live!’ on our ABC-affiliated local television stations, and the show will be pre-empted while we do so.”
“We are engaged in productive discussions with executives at the Walt Disney Company, with a focus on ensuring the program reflects and respects the diverse interests of the communities we serve,” the company added.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Democrats, Elizabeth warren, Senator, Senate, Nexstar, Sinclair, Preempt, Jimmy kimmel, Kimmel, Charlie kirk, Leftism, Leftist, Fcc, Politics