Category: blaze media

Former first lady Michelle Obama appealed to pro-abortion Americans by claiming a woman’s reproductive system is not primarily intended for bearing children.

On her podcast, “IMO,” Mrs. Obama and her guests discussed an alleged bias against women among lawmakers and the pharmaceutical industry, leading to a discussion in support of abortion on demand.

‘So many men have no idea about what women go through. Right? We haven’t been researched. We haven’t been considered.’

Co-host Craig Robinson kicked off the festivities by asking guest Dr. Sharon Malone, an ob-gyn, where women should go to get “proper information” regarding reproductive care, in vitro fertilization, menopause, and more. This related to Obama, as she suffered a miscarriage in the late 1990s and later used IVF to conceive her daughters, Malia and Sasha.

Without answering the question, the doctor immediately shifted to accusing the pharmaceutical industry of not advancing products for women out of bias, “because there’s no money to be made” there.

This set Obama off on a tangent about abortions, during which she claimed a lack of investment has led to difficult decisions for pregnant women.

RELATED: Obama judge blocks Trump — gives Harvard, foreign nationals what they want at America’s expense

“So many men have no idea about what women go through. Right? We haven’t been researched,” Obama claimed.

“We haven’t been considered, and it still affects the way a lot of male lawmakers, a lot of male politicians, a lot of male religious leaders think about the issue of choice, as if it’s just about the fetus, the baby. But women’s reproductive health is about our life.”

The explanation fell short of a compelling argument, however, with Obama saying that producing children is actually the “least” important function of a woman’s reproductive system.

“It’s about this whole complicated reproductive system that does — the least of what it does is produce life. It’s a very important thing that it does, but you only produce life if the machine that’s producing it — if you wanna, you know, whittle us down to a machine — is functioning in a healthy, streamlined kind of way.”

She added, “But there is no discussion or apparent connection between the two.”

RELATED: David Hogg spills the beans to undercover reporter about who really controlled the Biden White House

US President Barack Obama, first lady Michelle Obama, and daughters Malia and Sasha walk to board Air Force One at Cape Cod Air Force Station in Massachusetts on August 21, 2016. NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP via Getty Images

Blaze News spoke to Emily Erin Davis, VP of communications for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, who said hearing Obama’s comments was “heartbreaking.”

“It’s sad to see someone who once represented our country speak about women and children this way,” Davis said. “Comments like these don’t just devalue motherhood — they devalue womanhood itself.”

Similarly, Blaze News’ Rebeka Zeljko described Obama’s remarks as “absurd” and “damaging to women.”

“Many women regard motherhood as their greatest, most fulfilling accomplishment. The only people who ‘whittle us down to a machine’ are those who dehumanize unborn children and equate an abortion with taking a Tylenol.”

After Obama’s obscure explanation about women’s bodies, Dr. Malone asserted that a woman must “have control over her body, when and if to have a baby, and to decide how that pregnancy should continue.”

The doctor insisted she was not referring to abortion, however, and said she was referring only to a miscarriage or when the mother’s life is in danger.

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

​Health, Abortion, Women’s rights, Michelle obama, Reproductive rights, Pro life, Pro choice, Politics 

The internet is ablaze with clips of the recent “Jubilee” debate between Jordan Peterson and 20 atheists — and many on the right are criticizing Peterson for his answers to the theological questions presented.

However, BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey doesn’t believe the clips circulating on social media actually reflect Peterson’s performance.

“There were some things that he answered that I thought were really good, that I would affirm and say as well, and then there were other things that I’m like, ‘That is not at all the Christian perspective,’” Stuckey says on “Relatable.”

Peterson made four claims that the atheists were supposed to be contending with. The first claim is that “atheists reject God, but they don’t know what they’re rejecting.”

While the atheists took a major issue with this assertion, Stuckey believes they misunderstood Peterson’s point.

“Jordan did not actually claim that you can never reject that which you don’t understand. That’s not what he said. That’s what this atheist is assuming that he meant by his claim,” Stuckey says, explaining that instead, Peterson “claimed that atheists specifically reject that which they don’t understand, not that no one can reject anything that they don’t understand.”

Peterson’s second claim is that “morality and purpose can’t be found within science.”

“Maybe it’s too far to say the implication is that morality and purpose have to be from God — I would say Christianity — not just from any supernatural entity. But that seems to be the implication here,” Stuckey says. “And actually, the implication is what most of the debaters are debating against. And maybe that’s their error, or it’s a safe assumption.”

One atheist attempted to make the point that morality can’t come from Christianity, as slavery was depicted in the Bible. He also claimed that slavery ended because humans “evolved,” to which Peterson fired back, “The reason we evolved, so to speak, away from slavery was because the West was founded on Judeo-Christian morality and the presumption that every person was made in the image of God, and so slavery itself became immoral.”

“I liked the last part of Jordan Peterson’s answer there, because he is absolutely right,” Stuckey says, before diving into Peterson’s third claim — that “everyone worships something, including atheists.”

This part of the debate has gone the most viral, as an atheist named Danny, whom Stuckey calls “Reddit Timothee Chalamet,” did not appear to be arguing in good faith. Rather than really getting to the heart of the debate, he spoke over Peterson and focused on seemingly irrelevant points.

“Danny is probably trying to argue, in the same way, atheists attend to and prioritize certain things, but they don’t worship them,” Stuckey says, adding, “As a Protestant, I would say, ‘No, that is worship.’”

Peterson’s last claim is that “atheists accept Christian morality; they just deny the religious foundation of Christian morality,” which Stuckey agrees with.

“I actually think that Jordan Peterson did a lot better than some critics on social media are saying,” she says. “I enjoyed watching it, and it made me think myself, and I always welcome the opportunity to think more deeply about my faith and why I believe what I believe.”

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.

​Video phone, Sharing, Upload, Camera phone, Video, Free, Youtube.com, Relatable with allie beth stuckey, Relatable, Allie beth stuckey, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Jordan peterson, Jordan peterson jubilee debate, Atheist vs christian, Atheism, Christianity 

A U.S. appeals court reinstated the tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump on Mexico, Canada, and China on Thursday, after a federal trade court blocked them only one day previously.

The three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade found Wednesday that the administration had exceeded its authority by imposing the tariffs on the three largest trading partners to the U.S. On Thursday, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granted an emergency appeal by the Trump administration to reinstate the tariffs for the time being.

‘We are going to produce the cars and ships, chips, airplanes, minerals, and medicines that we need right here in America.’

The administration had invoked the tariffs under the provisions of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, but the trade court said that it did not apply to tariffs.

Other tariffs imposed through separate laws were not blocked by the trade court.

RELATED: Trump announces sweeping new tariffs at ‘Liberation Day’ celebration at White House

Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images

Critics of the tariffs have pointed to chaos on the stock market as well as on the bond market, but supporters say the economic strength of the U.S. will improve in the long run under the new global structure.

The three judges on the trade court include one nominated by Trump in his first term and two others nominated by former Presidents Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama.

The president is facing several other court challenges to the sweeping tariffs he announced on “Liberation Day” at the White House in April.

“From this day on, we’re not going to let anyone tell us American workers and families cannot have the future that they deserve,” the president said at the time. “We are going to produce the cars and ships, chips, airplanes, minerals, and medicines that we need right here in America.”

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

​Trump tariffs reinstated, Appeals court sides with trump, Trump tariffs, Trump liberation day, Politics 

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt ripped into the latest court order to get in the way of the Trump administration’s agenda after the president’s across-the-board tariffs were blocked.

Leavitt accused the federal trade court of “judicial overreach” and called on the Supreme Court to end what many see as judicial activism.

‘Ultimately, the Supreme Court must put an end to this for the sake of our Constitution.’

“The courts should have no role here,” she said in her media briefing on Thursday.

“There is a troubling and dangerous trend of unelected judges inserting themselves into the presidential decision-making process,” she said. “America cannot function if President Trump, or any other president for that matter, has their sensitive diplomatic or trade negotiations railroaded by activist judges.”

The panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade tossed out most of the president’s tariffs after finding that the tariffs were not authorized by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which Trump cited. The panel said that the emergencies cited by the president were not sufficiently related to trade.

On Thursday, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granted an emergency request from the Trump administration to reinstate the tariffs for the time being.

The issue may have to be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, which Leavitt called upon in her statement to the media.

“President Trump is in the process of rebalancing America’s trade agreements with the entire world, bringing tens of billions of dollars in tariff revenues to our country and finally ending the United States of America from being ripped off,” Leavitt continued. “These judges are threatening to undermine the credibility of the United States on the world stage.”

RELATED: Mexican president warns Trump tariff threat ‘would lead to inflation and job losses’ for both countries

Photo by Jim West/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

The three-panel federal trade court is composed of nominees from former Presidents Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama and one nominated by President Donald Trump.

“Ultimately, the Supreme Court must put an end to this for the sake of our Constitution,” Leavitt concluded.

The trade court ruling did not apply to other tariffs imposed under separate laws, but those tariffs have also been challenged by other lawsuits.

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

​Karoline leavitt on tariffs, Supreme court on trade, Tariff trade wars, Trump tariffs blocked, Politics 

The Environmental Protection Agency under President Trump is looking a lot different than the one that existed under Biden after Trump’s rollback of greenhouse gas limits.

The agency is now proposing to repeal all greenhouse gas emissions standards for fossil fuel-fired power plants, which would include requirements set under Biden.

“This is a big deal, because when you think about your electricity bill, when you think about the cost of powering the country, these power plants are a huge part of it,” BlazeTV host Stu Burguiere explains on “Stu Does America.”

“When you limit how they can produce the fuel that you need, you wind up driving up the cost of that energy. That’s why your power bills have probably gone up over the past couple of years,” he continues, noting that the reasoning behind Biden’s requirements were silly in the first place.

“You have to remember that 88% of emissions don’t come from the United States. Everyone’s obsessed with the United States and what we’re driving and what kind of power we’re using, but 88% of global emissions come from other places, not us,” Stu says. “So really, the focus on us just kind of seems to be a little bit more about anti-capitalism than anything else.”

And while 12% of global emissions do come from the United States, 75% of those emissions are coming from sources that are not power plants.

“What we’re talking about here is only 3% of global emissions. A little, tiny slice of a little, tiny slice that comes from coal and natural gas plants,” Stu explains. “And that’s not even the entire picture, because things have been changing, honestly, in a direction that nobody on television wants to tell you about, because everyone wants to scare you.”

“Everyone wants to tell you that the emissions are going crazy, and we’re all going to die, and global warming is coming to town, and it’s going to, you know, going to backhand you across the face, and we’re going to have these terrible storms,” he continues.

In a chart revealing the total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 to 2022, the amount continues to drop.

“They’ve been going down since the mid-2000s, not dramatically. Down from 5.5% in 2005,” Stu says. “With the exception, really, of the COVID year, where we had one dramatic drop. And even the dramatic drop, it wasn’t all that dramatic, which kind of tells you something about greenhouse emissions overall.”

“When we basically shut down our economy for a year,” he adds, “we just had a slight drop in greenhouse gas emissions.”

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.

​Video, Sharing, Video phone, Free, Camera phone, Upload, Youtube.com, Stu does america, Stu burguiere, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Environmental protection agency, Biden era rules and regulations, Greenhouse gas emissions, Greenhouse gas, Power plants, President trump, The trump administration, Epa, The epa 

Newly declassified records reportedly show that a key figure in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation lied to Congress about her involvement in the scheme to accuse Donald Trump of Russian collusion during his first presidential campaign.

The documents were
released by Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa as a part of the Senate Judiciary Committee probe into the origins of the collusion narrative.

‘The DOJ’s inaction on Nellie Ohr’s criminal referral — despite the obviously incriminating evidence provided in the FBI’s own analysis — undermines public trust in the rule of law.’

The FBI analysis from 2019 was declassified at Grassley’s request, through his role as the chair of the Judiciary Committee.

It documents the evidence that Nellie Ohr, researcher for Fusion GPS, had lied during sworn testimony before Congress about the opposition research firm that had been hired by the Democratic National Committee as well as the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign.

In one instance, Ohr testified that she had taken ham radio classes before hiring on at Fusion GPS, but it was later discovered that she had taken the classes during her employment at the firm.

Grassley said the FBI analysis concluded that Ohr had lied but that the DOJ declined to prosecute her at the time. He also claimed the FBI prevented agents from “reviewing all relevant information necessary to perform a full analysis” of Ohr’s allegedly criminal testimony.

In addition to several alleged lies Ohr told in her testimony, the analysis found reasonable evidence to conclude that Ohr “may have been involved” with drafting parts of the infamous Steele dossier, as well as conspiring with her husband, Bruce Ohr, who worked as an associate deputy attorney general at the Justice Department, to pass her work on to FBI officials.

“By lying to Congress, Nellie Ohr showed contempt for congressional oversight and the American people. What’s more, the FBI and DOJ’s failure to hold Ohr accountable for appearing to commit multiple felonies and its obstructive conduct against agents that sought additional information reveals the agencies’ deeply disturbing political bias,” said Grassley in a statement released Wednesday.

RELATED: Russian intelligence said Hillary Clinton approved campaign plan to tie Trump to Russian election interference, reveals Trump intel director

Photo by: John Lazenby/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

“Ohr never suffered consequences for advancing the phony Trump-Russia narrative and attempting to cover up her involvement in the hoax. Yet time and again, the American justice system has been weaponized against President Trump and his associates with reckless abandon,” he added.

He went on to praise FBI Director Kash Patel and U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi for their part in releasing the 43-page document from 2019.

“The DOJ’s inaction on Nellie Ohr’s criminal referral — despite the obviously incriminating evidence provided in the FBI’s own analysis — undermines public trust in the rule of law,” he concluded.

In 2023, Special Counsel John Durham
concluded in his report that the FBI had been biased against Trump when it investigated the allegations of Russian collusion and that the agency had found no evidence to substantiate the Steele dossier.

Here’s more about the Crossfire Hurricane scandal:

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

​Nellie ohr vs trump, Nellie ohr lied, Grassley investigation, Crossfire hurricane probe, Politics 

President Donald Trump’s State Department is leveraging the nation’s visa program to protect Americans from foreign speech censors, marking a monumental shift for free expression.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced Wednesday that the department would no longer grant visas for foreign nationals pushing to censor American speech.

‘America has the world’s strongest free-speech protections, but for years other countries have undermined those protections by globalizing their censorship regimes.’

He wrote in a post on X, “For too long, Americans have been fined, harassed, and even charged by foreign authorities for exercising their free speech rights.”

“Today, I am announcing a new visa restriction policy that will apply to foreign officials and persons who are complicit in censoring Americans. Free speech is essential to the American way of life — a birthright over which foreign governments have no authority,” Rubio stated.

RELATED: Trump halts student visas to bolster national security vetting: Report

Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

He added in a separate post, “Foreigners who work to undermine the rights of Americans should not enjoy the privilege of traveling to our country. Whether in Latin America, Europe, or elsewhere, the days of passive treatment for those who work to undermine the rights of Americans are over.”

Rubio’s announcement followed Vice President JD Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Conference in February, during which he expressed concern that American and European values are dangerously diverging. Vance specifically pointed to the erosion of freedom of speech protections in Europe.

“In Britain and across Europe, free speech, I fear, is in retreat,” he stated. “So I come here today, not just with an observation, but with an offer. And just as the Biden administration seemed desperate to silence people for speaking their minds, so the Trump administration will do precisely the opposite.”

Vance expressed interest in working with Europe to fortify free-speech protections and end censorship.

RELATED: Liberals freaked out over Vance’s Munich speech. Just wait till they read the State Department’s Substack.

Photo by Johannes Simon/Getty Images

Nico Perrino, the executive vice president of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, told Blaze News, “America has the world’s strongest free-speech protections, but for years other countries have undermined those protections by globalizing their censorship regimes.”

Perrino explained that in the past, the federal government has attempted to protect Americans from foreign censorship. He highlighted the 2010 SPEECH Act, which blocks foreign defamation rulings flouting First Amendment standards from being enforced in the U.S.

“The Trump administration appears to recognize the problem, and it’s generally a good thing that the administration is seeking solutions to protect Americans from foreign efforts to erode their First Amendment rights,” Perrino added. “How this new policy will be implemented, and whether it will have its desired effect, remains to be seen.”

— (@)

During February’s Artificial Intelligence Action Summit in Paris, Vance criticized the EU’s Digital Services Act for restricting speech on America-based technology platforms.

“Many of our most productive tech companies are forced to deal with the EU’s Digital Services Act and the massive regulations it created about taking down content and policing so-called misinformation,” Vance said. “For some, the easiest way to avoid the dilemma has been to simply block EU users in the first place.”

Rubio’s visa ban addresses Vance’s warnings about global censorship, concerns that U.S.-based technology leaders have also echoed, with the EU’s restrictions directly impacting American platforms, including Elon Musk’s X and Chris Pavlovski’s Rumble.

On Wednesday, Pavlovski praised Rubio for implementing the new visa restrictions against foreign censors, calling the move “an incredible win for free speech.”

Linda Yaccarino, the CEO of X, also expressed her support.

“We stand right alongside you, @SecRubio,” she wrote in a post on the social media platform.

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

​News, Donald trump, Trump, Trump administration, Trump admin, Marco rubio, Department of state, State department, Visas, Politics, Free speech, Freedom of speech, First amendment, European union, Eu, Jd vance 

Minneapolis police officers told Blaze Media they believe former officer Derek Chauvin should get a pardon for his federal conviction or a new trial at a minimum.

The officers listed many reasons why President Donald Trump should give Chauvin a pardon, even if it is clear he would not get a pardon on his state conviction. They pointed to how rigged the trial was and the police department falsely claiming the restraint Chauvin used on Floyd was not taught to officers. They also claimed Chauvin’s conviction has been the pretext to implement policies that make enforcing the law difficult.

The officers were part of exclusive interviews with Blaze Media for the five-year anniversary of the Black Lives Matter riots that ravaged the city after the death of George Floyd. They were on the force during the riots and remain on it today.

RELATED: Minneapolis cops speak out about BLM riots 5 years after 3rd Precinct burned

Scott Olson/Getty Images

“I think there’s a consensus that it was clearly that he was railroaded from that. I mean, you have the city doing the settlement [with Floyd’s family] before the trial has even begun. That is so corrupt,” one officer said.

The officer said what happened to Floyd was unfortunate, but claiming Chauvin murdered him was not justice.

“The restraint he was using was taught in Minneapolis by the police department. It was taught at the academy. I’ve had that restraint done to me, and I’ve done it to other people in the academy,” the officer said.

“I think people would like to see a pardon and see him get a new trial. … I don’t think there’s very many that feel the trial was fair to begin with. … You had razor wire, Jersey barriers, and everything set out” with a large crowd waiting outside the courthouse, another officer explained. “If you’re a member of that jury, how are you not afraid, you know? How are you not swayed?”

— (@)

Big-name conservatives like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and Jack Posobiec have come out recently to publicly lobby the Trump administration to issue the pardon. The White House said back in March it is not considering a pardon at this time.

Earlier this month, KSTP-TV reported that multiple sources informed them Governor Tim Walz (D), the Minnesota National Guard, Mayor Jacob Frey (D), and Hennepin County Sheriff Dawanna Witt have all been briefed on preparations for possible riots in the event of a pardon.

Watch the 10-minute interviews with the officers below. You can watch the full 30-minute documentary on BlazeTV.

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

​Politics 

Democratic National Committee Vice Chair David Hogg has proven an effective albeit unwitting saboteur on the left. In addition to spilling the beans about who was really running the Biden White House, the 25-year-old gun control activist hammered California Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D) for her alleged insider trading in newly released undercover footage from Project Veritas.

Hogg, warned not to challenge Democratic incumbents earlier this year by DNC Chairman Ken Martin, appears to say in the newly released video, “I would say Pelosi’s actually very good at her job. I don’t agree with the stock-trading stuff.”

“I mean, she gets better returns than almost every hedge fund in this city, every year,” continued Hogg. “Some of these members of Congress make trades that are way too well timed to not have insider knowledge.”

Pelosi, whose annual salary is now around $174,000, has a net worth of $260.37 million, according to Quiver Quantitative.

RELATED: Throw us a bone, Congress, and lay off the stock trough

Douglas Rissing/Getty Images

“They happen to be some of the best financial analysts in human history,” quipped Hogg, who is facing a potential ouster next month after party elites effectively declared his election null and void.

‘I just want to burn everything down.’

In his Blaze Originals documentary, “Bought and Paid For: How Politicians Get Filthy Rich,” James Poulos, the host of BlazeTV’s “Zero Hour” and the editor at large of Blaze Media, highlighted some of the “most egregious transactions” members of Congress have directly or indirectly pulled off in recent years — like making big investments in defense contractors on the eve of the war in Ukraine — without remorse or consequence.

A financial disclosure signed on July 2, 2021, by Nancy Pelosi revealed that her husband bet big on Alphabet, Amazon, and Apple stock ahead of the House Judiciary Committee’s vote on antitrust legislation that threatened to limit how those companies organized. According to Bloomberg, Mr. Pelosi’s trade secured him a $4.8 million gain.

In September, President Donald Trump demanded that Pelosi be prosecuted for alleged insider trading after her husband dumped 2,000 of his shares in Visa — valued at roughly $500,000 — two months before the company was sued by the Department of Justice for allegedly monopolizing the debit markets. Visa stock dropped by 5% following the announcement of the DOJ’s civil antitrust suit.

There are many more such cases of conveniently timed bets and dumps, not just from the Pelosi household but by others in Congress as well.

RELATED: David Hogg spills the beans to undercover reporter about who really controlled the Biden White House

Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

Multiple bills have been introduced in recent years that would ban congressional stock trading, including Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley’s Preventing Elected Leaders from Owning Securities and Investments Act — or PELOSI Act for short.

While Hogg apparently shares the concern expressed by Trump and other Republicans, it’s not a battle he’s willing to fight.

Hogg told the Project Veritas journalist, “The hardest part about my job is I just want to burn everything down because it’s all so corrupt. But you got to pick your battles and slowly build your momentum.”

The DNC vice chair noted that even if he tried to hold Pelosi accountable, “we wouldn’t beat her.” He suggested that it was instead preferable to go after members who “are far weaker.”

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

​Dnc, Democratic national committee, Nancy pelosi, Pelosi, Corruption, Washington, Swamp, Hogg, David hogg, Undercover, Project veritas, Politics 

Billionaire entrepreneur Palmer Luckey says Meta is a very different company than it used to be, and he’s ready to work with Mark Zuckerberg again after being fired from Facebook in 2017.

Luckey, the creator of virtual reality goggles called Oculus Rift, was fired by Facebook allegedly for donating $10,000 to a pro-Donald Trump group. Almost 10 years later as founder of Anduril, a military tech company, Luckey announced on X that he was ready to reunite with Zuckerberg to create VR and augmented reality systems for the U.S. military.

‘The people who conspired to oust me, they’re not even there anymore.’

“Anduril and Meta have teamed up to make the world’s best AR and VR systems for the United States Military,” Luckey wrote on X, alongside a photo with Zuckerberg. “Leveraging Meta’s massive investments in XR technology for our troops will save countless lives and dollars.”

Luckey revealed the first project would be a military helmet called Eagle Eye, equipment that would give Army soldiers access to advanced augmented reality systems that makes them “superhuman.”

“My mission has long been to turn warfighters into technomancers, and the products we are building with Meta do just that,” Luckey said in a press release.

RELATED: Oculus creator fires back at ‘politically obsessive journalists’ as hit-piece culture dies

Mark Zuckerberg is seen at UFC 298 at Honda Center on February 17, 2024, in Anaheim, California. Photo by Sean M. Haffey/Getty Images

On the podcast “Core Memory,” Luckey explained what was long thought to be the real reason behind his exodus from Facebook: an impending revolt from an army of tech-leftists ideologically opposed to his political donations.

“Meta is a very different company than it was nine years ago when they fired me,” Luckey told the host. “I don’t mean in tenor or tone. I mean it’s literally different people.”

Luckey claimed that while Zuckerberg still likely approved of his firing, it was more so his subordinates who orchestrated his removal.

“When your people that you task with making decisions come up and say, ‘This is what we’ve decided we have to do. There’s no other way out of this huge PR and internal problem. Our employees are insane radical leftists who are going to quit en masse if we don’t get rid of Palmer,’ like, what are you really gonna do?”

“The people who conspired to oust me, they’re not even there anymore,” Luckey added.

RELATED: Back to the future? Palmer Luckey’s Chromatic does nostalgia right

Return’s James Poulos asked if America is actually ready for the advanced “techomancers” Luckey speaks of.

“It may be too late to ask. The specter of China’s immense production capabilities and verve for systematization presents America with a much different threat profile than its two great Axis enemies,” Poulos stated.

“It would be a harsh lesson indeed to discover that the only way to compete militarily with China is to lose our own identity here at home. That’s a problem no tech alone can solve,” he added.

Luckey seemingly found solace in the reconciliation with Meta and its now apparently right-wing CEO Zuckerberg. Almost talking himself into it, the Anduril boss said it was likely more productive for him to accept that he “won the persuasion argument” and should be happy he received apologies from Meta’s top brass.

“If people end up coming to your side, you shouldn’t shove them back and say ‘Hey, f**k off. You had different beliefs 10 years ago.’ You should say, ‘Come on in, the tent’s big, and I’m happy to have you.'”

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

​Tech, Zuckerberg, Palmer luckey, Meta, Facebook, Anduril, Politics 

When woke mobs began chasing off guest speakers from college campuses and elite institutions started investigating scientists over minor infractions against gender orthodoxy, a certain class of moderate progressives realized its reign was ending. Figures like Sam Harris, Bari Weiss, and Michael Shermer weren’t conservatives by any stretch. In the George W. Bush or Barack Obama years, they would have qualified as mainstream progressives. But they couldn’t keep pace with the radical left.

These disaffected progressives needed a new label. But they couldn’t bring themselves to align with the “backward” conservatives they’d spent careers ridiculing. Venture capitalist Eric Weinstein coined the term “Intellectual Dark Web,” which Weiss attempted to popularize in the New York Times. But most settled on “classical liberal” to describe their stance. The problem? They had spent years rejecting classical liberalism.

Disillusioned progressives are not conservatives. They’re not classical liberals, either. They don’t get to define the future of the right.

“Classical liberal” serves as the ideal label for repackaging Obama-era liberalism in a way that reassures Republicans while keeping a safe distance from the woke left. It sounds moderate compared to identity politics. It evokes America’s founders — Washington, Jefferson, Adams. If you want to appear reasonable to conservatives while shielding yourself from attacks on your right flank, aligning with the founders is a smart move.

Whether the branding strategy was intentional remains debatable. What’s not in question is how badly this self-description distorted classical liberalism.

Some members of the Intellectual Dark Web drifted right. Most did not. They held tightly to progressive instincts. Many were atheists. Some had built careers in the New Atheist movement, penning books mocking Christianity and debating apologists for sport. Several were openly gay, and most championed same-sex marriage. These were not defenders of tradition — they spent decades undermining it.

They didn’t oppose the revolution. They led it — until the mob turned on the parts they still cherished, like feminism or science.

Toleration of all … except atheists

When the Intellectual Dark Web embraced the “classical liberal” label, it did so to defend free speech. Most of these disillusioned progressives had been canceled — for “misgendering” someone, for not parroting the latest racial orthodoxies, or for refusing to bow to ideological litmus tests. They longed for an earlier version of progressivism, one where they still held the reins, and radical activists didn’t dictate the terms of debate.

This shared frustration became the rallying point between conservatives and anti-woke liberals. Free speech offered common ground, so both sides leaned into it. But classical liberalism involves far more than vague nods to open dialogue.

Some trace liberalism’s roots to Machiavelli or Hobbes. But in the American tradition, it begins with John Locke. Much of the Declaration of Independence reads like Thomas Jefferson channeling Locke — right down to the line about “life, liberty, and property,” slightly rewritten as “the pursuit of happiness.”

In “A Letter Concerning Toleration,” Locke argued for religious toleration among Christian sects. He even entertained the idea of tolerating Catholics — if they renounced allegiance to the pope. But Locke drew a hard line at one group: atheists.

“Lastly, those are not at all to be tolerated who deny the being of a God,” Locke wrote. “Promises, covenants, and oaths, which are the bonds of human society, can have no hold upon an atheist … [they] undermine and destroy all religion can have no pretense of religion whereupon to challenge the privilege of a toleration.”

For Locke, atheism was social acid. It dissolved the moral glue holding a nation together. A silent unbeliever who kept to himself might avoid trouble — but even then, Locke saw no reason to trust such a man with power. Atheism, in Locke’s view, posed a civilizational threat.

Indispensable religion

Now, consider the irony. Many of today’s self-declared “classical liberals” rose to prominence attacking religion. They led the New Atheist crusade. They mocked believers, ridiculed Christianity, and wrote bestsellers deriding faith as delusion. These weren’t defenders of liberal order. They launched a secular jihad against the very moral foundation that made liberalism possible.

Their adoption of the “classical liberal” label isn’t just unserious. It’s either historically illiterate or deliberately deceptive.

It’s a mistake to treat America’s founders as a monolith. They disagreed — often sharply — and those disagreements animate much of the “Federalist Papers.” But one point remains clear: Their understanding of free speech and religious liberty diverged sharply from modern secular assumptions.

RELATED: Labeling you ‘phobic’ is how the left dodges real arguments

sesame via iStock/Getty Images

Even after the Constitution and Bill of Rights were ratified, several states retained official churches. Courts regularly upheld blasphemy laws well into the 20th century. Some state supreme courts continued defending them into the 1970s. Blue laws, which restrict commerce on Sundays to preserve the Sabbath, remain on the books in several states.

John Adams put it plainly: The Constitution was “made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” The founders, and the citizens they represented, expected America to function as an explicitly Christian nation. Free speech and religious liberty existed within that framework — not apart from it.

Skin suit liberalism

So when non-woke liberals claim that “classical liberalism” demands a secular or religiously neutral government, they misrepresent history. That idea would have struck the founders as absurd. The Constitution was not written for New Atheists. Adams said so himself.

Faced with these historical facts, critics usually pivot. They argue that America has morally advanced beyond its founding values. Today, we tolerate non-Christian religions, recognize women’s rights, and legalize same-sex marriage. These changes, they claim, bring us closer to “true” American principles like freedom and equality.

Classical liberalism was a real political tradition — one that helped shape the American founding. It deserves serious treatment. Watching it get paraded around by people who reject its core values is exhausting. If Locke or Adams saw progressive atheists wearing classical liberalism like a skin suit, they’d spin in their graves.

The secular liberalism of the 1990s and early 2000s is not classical liberalism. It isn’t even an ally of conservatism. The non-woke left served as useful co-belligerents against the radical fringe, but they were never true allies — and they should never be allowed to lead the conservative movement.

Some have earned respect. Carl Benjamin, Jordan Peterson, and others have taken real steps to the right, even toward Christianity. That deserves credit. But let’s not kid ourselves. Many who still fly the “classical liberal” banner don’t believe in the values it represents. They reject its religious foundation. They rewrite its history. They co-opt its label while advancing a worldview its founders would have rejected outright.

Disillusioned progressives are not conservatives. They’re not classical liberals, either. They don’t get to define the future of the right. And they certainly don’t get to lead it.

​Opinion & analysis, The left, Intellectual dark web, Liberalism, Bari weiss, Sam harris, Michael shermer, Jordan peterson, John locke, American founding, John adams, Thomas jefferson, George washington, Progressives, Cancel culture, Transgender agenda, Free speech, Campus protests, Christianity, The right, Conservatism 

Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) announced he is running for governor of Alabama, soon vacating a seat and prompting a potentially competitive Republican primary.

Tuberville was a successful college football coach at Auburn, Cincinnati, and more. Now, discussions are reportedly already under way to find his replacement, with another NCAA coach rumored to be the favored candidate for a 2026 special primary.

‘The compensation is a little bit different.’

According to a report from Semafor, Auburn men’s basketball coach Bruce Pearl has plans to run for the vacant seat and was on Capitol Hill discussing those plans last week.

The most obvious factor that could stop Pearl from running is his lucrative contract that is supposed to keep him at Auburn through 2030. According to On3, Pearl signed a contract extension in 2022 worth $6.28 million per year, totaling over $50 million.

At the same time, Tuberville told the media he does not want Pearl to run and does not think he will.

RELATED: GOP saboteurs join Democrats to derail Trump’s justice agenda

Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) in his office in December 2024. Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

“The compensation is a little bit different,” Tuberville told Semafor. “I wouldn’t let [Pearl] do it because he did such a good job at Auburn. We need him there.”

The basketball coach has an incredibly political social media timeline; his X feed is filled with shared posts that are pro-Israel and critical of Iran.

“Enriched Uranium is for a weapon, not power,” Pearl wrote. “Iran says it will not give up its ability to enrich uranium against US demands. For Iran, it is a matter of national honor and part of their identity. If Iran had it, they would use it! Dismantle it now 4peace or Israel needs to do it.”

RELATED: ‘This will absolutely kill college sports’: Dartmouth men’s basketball ends bid to become first NCAA player’s union

— (@)

Pearl has been successful at Auburn since joining as head coach in 2014. He brought the basketball team its first conference championship in 19 years in 2018, with two more in 2022 and 2025. The 65-year-old is also responsible for Auburn’s only two NCAA Final Four appearances: in 2019 and 2025.

In 2011, Pearl, then the head coach at the University of Tennessee, was accused of lying to the NCAA about an unofficial visit from an athlete attending a cookout at his home. Pearl was alleged to have told the athlete and his father not to mention it.

Coach Pearl did not respond to Blaze News’ request for comment.

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

​Sports, Basketball, Ncaa, Alabama, Auburn, Senate, Republicans, Gop, Primary, Politics 

Jake Tapper just got to personally experience the Democrat Party’s vitriol. While on tour promoting his new book with Alex Thompson, “Original Sin,” the CNN anchor was roasted on a “left-leaning podcast” about his 15-year-old son’s career aspirations.

Pat Gray plays the clip of Tapper recounting his experience on “The Prof G Pod” with Scott Galloway.

“I went on a left-leaning podcast that shall remain nameless, and we were talking about my kids … and they asked me about my son, and I said, you know, he’s a football player and he wants to be a policeman,” Tapper told Galloway.

“And their joke was … ‘Oh, well, how does he feel about minorities?’ Like the idea that he wants to be a policeman, therefore he’s racist,” he recounted. “And then I got dragged in the comments and all that stuff.”

“I thought to myself, this is why you f*****g are losing elections! Like my football-playing son who has no political views … you’re deciding he’s a racist because he wants to be a cop, and why does he want to be a cop? He wants to be a cop because he wants to help people,” Tapper continued, adding, “This is how the Democrat Party talks to men — not just white men but men.”

“I find it just insane,” he concluded.

And so does everyone who doesn’t buy into the left’s woke, race-obsessed agenda.

“Welcome to the party,” laughs Pat, “the party that celebrates how awful the Democrats are.”

Tapper, he says, is “getting a really good dose of reality here.”

But even though he’s finally admitting the Democrat Party’s faults, and even though his book is an exposé of how Joe Biden’s mental decline was intentionally covered up, which really isn’t an exposé because everyone who was paying attention already knew it, including Tapper, Pat still isn’t buying his book.

“I’m not gonna give him a dime,” he declares.

To see the footage of Tapper’s interview and hear more of Pat’s commentary, watch the clip above.

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.

​Pat gray unleashed, Pat gray, Blazetv, Blaze media, Jake tapper, Original sin, Original sin book, Cnn 

A Florida sheriff recently welcomed an apprehended man from out of state who is accused of threatening to kill him — and the sheriff greeted the suspect with a promise to put him in a rubber room.

Viral video shows Volusia Sheriff Mike Chitwood speaking face-to-face with 45-year-old Matthew Moulton at the Daytona Beach International Airport.

‘Just so you know, I’m the one who made sure you came back, and I hope you enjoy your stay at the branch jail.’

Moulton — of College Place, Washington — was extradited to Florida last Wednesday for reportedly making threats against the sheriff, the Daytona Beach News-Journal reported.

Moulton was booked into the Volusia County Branch Jail the same day and held on a $100,000 bond, the paper said, adding that he faces a charge of written or electronic threats to kill or do bodily injury, which is a second-degree felony in Florida — punishable with up to 15 years in prison.

Moulton is accused of sending a threatening email to Sheriff Chitwood.

RELATED: Wild video: Florida cop clings to hood of moving car, shoots through windshield on busy downtown street in broad daylight

choochart via iStock / Getty Images Plus

Citing the arrest report, WTVJ-TV said Moulton sent an alarming email to Chitwood around 5:24 a.m. March 20 in which he told the sheriff, “I’m going to have to threaten you with death. It’s coming. There’s nothing you can do to stop it.”

WFLA-TV, citing the affidavit, said Moulton likely was angry at Chitwood because the sheriff started a campaign last year to post mug shots and “perp walks” for students who fabricate public school shooting threats.

Citing the arrest report, the News-Journal noted that Moulton wrote, “Do you know what the internet does with children you expose? They put them in AI and make child porn with them.”

The Volusia Sheriff’s Office contacted law enforcement in Washington regarding the threatening email on the same day it was sent, the paper added.

Law enforcement officers visited Moulton at his residence the same day to question him about the threatening email, according to WTVJ.

The arrest report said Moulton told police that he “believed the threats to be satirical and artistic and designed within the parameters of the First Amendment,” WTVJ noted.

In a video shared on Facebook by the Volusia County Sheriff’s Office, Moulton is seen being escorted down an airport escalator as Sheriff Chitwood stands waiting for him at the bottom.

Chitwood greeted Moulton by saying, “Matthew, I’m Sheriff Chitwood. I’m the guy you want to kill, and there’s nothing I can do about it. Challenge accepted.”

Moulton replied that he had sent him a sermon from Romans 5.

RELATED: Deputies shoot growling Florida man dead after ‘bizarre’ standoff — and just moments after he survived alligator attack: Cops

rarrarorro via iStock / Getty Images Plus

Sheriff Chitwood noted, “But you do know in Florida, a written threat to kill is a felony? You know that, right?”

“Just so you know, I’m the one who made sure you came back, and I hope you enjoy your stay at the branch jail,” Chitwood told the man who reportedly wanted to kill him.

Moulton said, “You violated my rights.”

Chitwood interjected by saying, “I will also tell you that you will not see Mickey Mouse on this trip, and you have to reimburse us for your flight here and for your stay at the county jail.”

Chitwood asked, “Why don’t you look me in the eye and tell me why you want me dead?”

Moulton responded, “I am a Christian,” to which the sheriff fired back: “So am I.”

Moulton claimed Chitwood wasn’t a Christian because: “In Corinthians, it says bondsmen are not Christian.”

Sheriff Chitwood escorted the suspect to a police cruiser and told him, “OK, we’re going to take you where you need to. We’ll make sure the cell has rubber in it.”

Moulton is scheduled to appear in court on June 19, WFLA said.

RELATED: Florida sheriff warns illegal aliens to self-deport in 3 words; DeSantis vows Florida will back Trump’s immigration crackdown

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

​Florida, Florida crime, Florida sheriff, Murder, Viral video, Police video, Crime, Threats, Volusia county sheriff’s office, Mike chitwood 

If someone said a state was attacking the First Amendment, most conservatives would assume it was California or New York. But shockingly, it’s Texas — the supposed conservative bulwark — that’s threatening free speech.

Texas House Bill 366, now pending before the state Senate, targets “digitally altered” political ads. But its vague wording and draconian penalties risk criminalizing satire, parody, and grassroots messaging — the very tools conservatives use to fight media bias and elite narratives. Texans must reject this betrayal of core constitutional principles.

HB 366 treats satire, memes, and parody as threats, even though they’ve become essential weapons in the right’s arsenal.

HB 366, sponsored by former Republican Speaker Dade Phelan, requires disclaimers for any political ad containing “altered media” if the originator spends more than $100. The penalty? A Class A misdemeanor and up to a year in jail.

Supporters claim the law would curb AI-generated deepfakes that mislead voters. But the bill doesn’t narrowly target malicious deception — it swings wildly, threatening legitimate political speech.

Conservatives agree that deepfakes pose real risks. A video of Trump endorsing Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez could confuse voters. But HB 366 isn’t a scalpel — it’s a sledgehammer. It treats satire, memes, and parody as threats, even though they’ve become essential weapons in the right’s arsenal.

The bill’s flaws are obvious. “Altered media” can mean anything — a high-tech AI fake or a Photoshopped image of Phelan in a cowboy hat. The $100 threshold? Pocket change in the world of online ads. That barely covers a few boosted X posts or a Canva subscription. The law targets ordinary citizens, not professional propagandists.

Enforcement falls to the Texas Ethics Commission, which will find itself chasing down conservative meme-makers. Post a viral cartoon mocking your opponent? Forget the fine print and face jail time. That’s not transparency — it’s censorship backed by handcuffs.

State Rep. Shelley Luther, one of the few real conservatives in Austin, nailed it: “We’re banning political memes and giving people up to a year in jail for failing to attach a disclosure to a cartoon.”

She’s right. Memes are a modern megaphone. They slice through corporate media spin and Big Tech suppression. From “Let’s Go Brandon” to Trump’s dance clips, they connect with voters in a way that no white paper or campaign ad ever could.

Under HB 366, a well-timed meme could land you behind bars.

What’s Phelan’s motivation here? He blames the rise of deepfakes. In this case, it’s personal. A 2024 mailer featured an altered image of him hugging Nancy Pelosi. But instead of toughening up, he decided to muzzle political ridicule. State Rep. Nate Schatzline called the bill “anti-American.” He’s right. The First Amendment doesn’t make exceptions for thin-skinned Republicans.

HB 366 hands more power to the elites — media gatekeepers, tech censors, and government bureaucrats — to decide what counts as “deceptive.” Conservatives, once again, will be the first targets. As Jefferson warned, “An unjust law is no law at all.” This bill insults the Constitution and the voters it claims to protect.

Instead of punishing citizens, lawmakers should narrowly target AI-generated deepfakes created with the intent to deceive. Use civil penalties, not jail time. Raise the spending threshold to $10,000 to focus on major players, not patriots with PayPal accounts. And educate voters to spot deception — don’t criminalize dissent.

Texas is the last place conservatives should expect to fight for free speech. But if this bill passes, no red state is safe. HB 366 doesn’t just endanger Texans — it threatens the digital backbone of the conservative movement.

Memes, satire, and humor have carried our message where mainstream channels won’t. Let’s not let bad law do what the left couldn’t: silence us.

​Opinion & analysis, Texas, First amendment, Political satire, Memes, Hb 366, Dade phelan, Nancy pelosi, Deepfake, Artificial intelligence, Ai, Ethics, Misdemeanor, Censorship, Anti-american, Propaganda, Crime, Fines 

Minneapolis police officers had heavy criticisms for Governor Tim Walz (D) and were left dumbfounded as to why former Vice President Kamala Harris picked him to be her running mate for the 2024 election.

The officers gave their thoughts on the ordeal during an exclusive interview with Blaze Media for the five-year anniversary of the Black Lives Matter riots that ravaged the city after the death of George Floyd. The police officers interviewed were part of the Minneapolis Police Department’s response to the week-long riots, and they say Walz’s ineffective leadership during an intense moment of crisis made the situation worse.

RELATED: Minneapolis cops speak out about BLM riots 5 years after 3rd Precinct burned

Scott Olson/Getty Images

“I think he made some comments leading up to the last election to make it sound like he supports law enforcements, but I think his actions and indecision … back in 2020 proved otherwise,” said one officer.

“That made no sense to me that they chose the guy who let all of this happen in one of the largest metropolitan areas, that he would be considered to run for the vice presidency. He has been way over his head in the current office that he holds. I can’t believe that they would even consider him for that after [the riots],” a second officer said. “He should be ashamed for everything that happened there.”

The second officer also lambasted Mayor Jacob Frey (D) and the Minneapolis City Council because “it’s been a complete embarrassment since all this has happened, with all their decisions that they’ve made with how to run the police department.”

Frey is running for re-election to a third term as mayor.

Since his election defeat, Walz appears to be laying the groundwork for a 2028 presidential run by holding town halls in other states to protest against the Trump administration.

“I would actually love to see [Walz] run again,” a third officer admitted.

When asked why, the officer said, “I got a lot of amusement out of his 2024 vice presidential run, because I think it just really opened the window to a lot of people nationally to see kind of how goofy he is. I think a lot of people looked up and said, ‘Who is this guy?’ In Minnesota, we had to raise our hands and said, ‘Yeah, he’s ours. Sorry.'”

RELATED: Tim Walz compares ICE to Nazi police and gets slapped with brutal backlash

— (@)

Watch a 10-minute interview with the officers below. You can watch the full 30-minute documentary on BlazeTV.

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

​Politics 

On Sunday, May 25, “Duck Dynasty” patriarch Phil Robertson joined Jesus in heaven after a courageous battle with Alzheimer’s disease and other health challenges. He leaves behind a legacy defined by his unwavering devotion to Jesus Christ and a fervent mission to guide others to salvation.

Phil’s impact was profound and far-reaching. His powerful testimony of redemption — transformed from a life of darkness to one radiant with the grace of Jesus — has guided countless individuals to seek repentance and embrace faith. In the wake of his passing, thousands have shared heartfelt stories about how Phil touched their lives. The impact he had will surely echo for generations to come.

Nobody, however, felt Phil Robertson’s presence more deeply than the people who shared life with him.

On this episode of “Unashamed,” Uncle Si, Zach Dasher and his wife, Jill, and longtime friend and Duck Commander General Manager Justin Martin gather to celebrate the man who forever changed their lives. Through tears and joy, they honor Phil’s enduring faith, love, and the indelible mark he left on their hearts.

“Even though Phil said, ‘Don’t cry,’ we’re going to cry,” says Martin. “The boss is home.”

“It’s not tears of sadness, OK? This is celebration time. He’s done done his stay on this earth,” says Si, adding that he “already knew” about Phil’s passing before the phone call came.

The group reflect about how they were praying for God to bring Phil home. He was suffering, not himself, and deeply missing “God’s creation,” where he spent the majority of his time. His passing was, therefore, a bittersweet mercy.

They also recall how Phil’s sister, Jan, foreknew the impact her brother would have if he came to know Jesus.

“Jan Robertson was the only one that didn’t give up on Phil when he was running with the devil,” says Si. “She said, ‘Y’all have no idea how many people he’s going to bring to Jesus,’ and she was right.”

Zach’s brother-in-law asked ChatGPT to estimate how many people heard the gospel from Phil Robertson, and it came back with the staggering number of “40 million people.”

“I’m even gonna say that that’s low,” says Martin, “and I think that number is only gonna grow, even in the state of which we’re in.”

“We’re not even to the ripples yet. Phil Robertson’s still got a tidal wave right now. … We ain’t even crested yet to get to the ripple, because the ripple is going to extend through my children, through y’all’s children,” he adds.

To hear the group’s stories about how Phil impacted them personally, watch the episode above. Grab a box of tissues — you’ll need them for this heartfelt tribute.

Want more from the Robertsons?

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

​Unashamed, Unashamed with phil robertson, Phil robertsons, Uncle si, Zach dasher, Duck dynasty, Duck commander, Phil robertson death, Blazetv, Blaze media 

After years of unceasing Democrat lawfare, the Trump administration is setting its sights on potentially illegal activity that occurred under the Biden administration — and there’s a lot of it.

Top officials within the Democrat fundraising platform ActBlue are in danger of being subpoenaed if they refuse to interviews with House committees investigating allegations that the platform accepted fraudulent and foreign donations during the 2024 presidential campaign.

“Democrats are just, I mean, they are really floundering,” Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck says on “The Glenn Beck Program.” “And maybe we’re going to see some more justice here. ActBlue officials, they have been asked to come testify in front of Congress because Congress is doing a foreign donations probe.”

“Foreign donations, that would be like if Trump was being funded by the Russians. That’s a pretty big deal,” Glenn continues. “Now, the ActBlue people are refusing to testify, and Congress is like, ‘That’s fine, we’ll subpoena you.’ So there might be some people going to jail there.”

And Glenn believes this is only the beginning.

“I’m telling you, handcuffs are coming. Handcuffs are coming over the next couple of months. I think we’re going to see lots of handcuffs coming out. We’re going to see handcuffs on the people of COVID, the COVID fraud, the cover-up,” Glenn says.

“It’s going to be the people that knew that there were really dangerous side effects and then tried to cover that up and keep that out of the press and keep people from knowing about those side effects,” he continues.

“Those people, you’re going to see them in handcuffs, I think, very soon,” he adds.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

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

​Video, Sharing, Free, Upload, Video phone, Camera phone, Youtube.com, The glenn beck program, Glenn beck, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Foreign donations, Russia, Actblue, Democrat corruption, Congress, Fraudulent political donations, Covid-19 tyranny, Covid-19 vaccines, Fauci arrest, Fauci pardon, Covid-19 vaccine side effects, Vaccine side effects 

For years, the FBI denied that key evidence existed in the Oklahoma City bombing. But court documents, leaked files, and eyewitness accounts suggest a darker truth buried beneath the official story.

President Bill Clinton visited a church in Oklahoma City on April 19 to mark the 30th anniversary of the 1995 bombing that resulted in the deaths of 168 people. In his remarks, Clinton said we “owe” it to the victims to “do better” in honor of their sacrifice. But just like three decades ago, commemorating the bombing still requires airbrushing a mountain of contradictory evidence.

This is a test of whether the Trump administration will honor its promises on transparency.

Clinton’s Justice Department owed the nation the full truth about the bombing. Instead, it spun a cover story that both distorted the past and endangered the future, leaving the American people exposed to new threats.

Among the most striking but forgotten facts surrounding the Oklahoma City bombing is the mystery of “John Doe 2,” a man 24 eyewitnesses claimed to have seen in the Ryder truck with Timothy McVeigh. The FBI now insists he never existed.

After the bombing, the media abandoned its role as a watchdog and became, in too many cases, an enabler of the official narrative of lone-wolf terror. It professed that the FBI acted swiftly and heroically, the Justice Department delivered justice, and President Clinton led the country through its pain with grace and resolve.

Fortunately, not everyone gave up on the truth. Today’s most relentless truth-seekers are anonymous digital investigators and citizen journalists, armed with Freedom of Information Act filings, archived footage, and a hunger to uncover what the gatekeepers tried to hide.

I’ve been part of one such effort for almost two decades. Working alongside attorney Jesse Trentadue, I’ve investigated the likely connection between the Oklahoma City bombing and the horrific 1995 death of Jesse’s brother, Kenneth, in federal custody. Jesse’s FOIA lawsuits unearthed shocking documents about the FBI’s concealed activities — clues that led us deeper into the bureau’s involvement than we could have imagined.

Then, a former FBI undercover operative came forward. What he revealed gave us a key piece of the puzzle. And yet for all we’ve uncovered, the vaults of secrecy remain shut.

Which brings us to a critical moment. On March 26, Trentadue submitted a letter to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, urging the release of a decade-old sealed deposition from that very whistleblower. The contents of that deposition could expose the true scope of PATCON — the FBI’s sweeping 1990s operation to infiltrate alleged right-wing extremist groups — and potentially tie it directly to the Oklahoma City bombing.

This is a test of whether the Trump administration will honor its promises of transparency. Very few are aware that the Oklahoma City bombing was caught on camera. We know this not just from speculative claims but from on-the-record sources — contemporaneous media reports, corroborating federal files, and sworn FBI testimony. The footage exists. It’s a documented fact. Yet the tapes remain hidden. Authorities only released video of the aftermath.

For over a decade, the FBI fought Trentadue in court to keep the video out of public view. The footage may prove conclusively that McVeigh was not acting alone. If made public, the tapes could shatter the myth of lone-wolf domestic terror. They could implicate associates of McVeigh who were never charged.

Further, the videos could show that 168 Americans were murdered not just by a madman but by a preventable failure of federal surveillance — or worse, by a deliberate cover-up. This cover story has allowed neo-Nazi terrorists to slip through the cracks, denied justice to the victims, and kept the American public in the dark for far too long.

That’s why the Justice Department must act. Release the tapes. Unseal the deposition. Let the American people decide for themselves what really happened. We stand at the threshold of a new era in open-source journalism. If the Trump Justice Department delivers on its promise to unmask secrets, it could mark the rebirth of investigative integrity in America.

As Senator John Kennedy (R-La.) wryly observed earlier this year, “Sounds to me like we need to get some new conspiracy theories, because all the old ones turned out to be true.”

It’s time to test another.

​Opinion & analysis, Oklahoma city bombing, Timothy mcveigh, Fbi, Justice department, Inspector general, Cover-up, Lawsuit, Foia, John doe 2, Pam bondi, Donald trump, Transparency, Video 

A New York-based federal court has temporarily handicapped the Trump administration, removing some of its leverage in trade wars with foreign powers.

A three-judge panel at the U.S. Court of International Trade on Wednesday voided and permanently blocked President Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” 10% baseline tariff on goods imported from most countries as well as his reciprocal tariffs on scores of individual nations.

The court unanimously held that while the president has authority to respond to national emergencies with tariffs, embargoes, and sanctions, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act he invoked “does not authorize the President to impose unbounded tariffs.”

‘The Worldwide and Retaliatory tariffs are thus ultra vires and contrary to law.’

The court suggested that letting Trump impose unbounded tariffs might run afoul of the Constitution’s separation of powers, as the Constitution assigns Congress the power to regulate foreign commerce and impose tariffs. Critics have stressed, however, that Congress has over the years delegated much of this authority to the president and the executive branch — authority largely unchallenged until now.

“The Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariffs do not comply with the limitations Congress imposed upon the President’s power to respond to balance-of-payments deficits,” the court said in its opinion. “The President’s assertion of tariff-making authority in the instant case, unbounded as it is by any limitation in duration or scope, exceeds any tariff authority delegated to the President under IEEPA. The Worldwide and Retaliatory tariffs are thus ultra vires and contrary to law.”

RELATED: Trump’s reciprocal tariffs — and decades of devastating fees the world pushed on America

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

The decision halts Trump’s existing IEEPA tariffs and prevents him from increasing tariffs, including the paused 145% tariff on imports from China and the recently threatened 50% tariffs on imports from the European Union. It also scraps Trump’s orders applying 25% duties on Canadian and Mexican products.

The Trump administration immediately appealed the decision.

‘The judicial coup is out of control.’

Since the Court of International Trade had effectively resolved two lawsuits before it in a single opinion — a lawsuit brought by the Liberty Justice Center on behalf of several businesses and a lawsuit filed by a gang of blue-state state attorneys general — the government asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to consolidate its appeals.

Jeffrey Schwab, director of litigation at the Liberty Justice Center, said in a statement, “This ruling reaffirms that the president must act within the bounds of the law, and it protects American businesses and consumers from the destabilizing effects of volatile, unilaterally imposed tariffs.”

Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield, one of the Democrats who fought to axe the tariffs, celebrated the ruling, stating, “President Trump’s sweeping tariffs were unlawful, reckless, and economically devastating.”

White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller noted on X, “The judicial coup is out of control.”

Miller added Thursday, “We are living under a judicial tyranny.”

RELATED: Why voters are done compromising with the ‘America Last’ elite

Photographer: Yuki Iwamura/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Regardless of whether the government is successful in its appeal, the Trump administration has other ways of pursuing its desired tariffs, including under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, Section 232 of Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Sections 301 of the 1974 Trade Act, and Section 338 of the Trade Act of 1930.

Alec Phillips, managing director at Goldman Sachs, indicated that the president is authorized under Section 122 to tackle a balance-of-deficit, reported MarketWatch. Since that particular law does not demand a formal investigation or process, Trump could use it to immediately impose tariffs of up to 15%. The downside is that Section 122 tariffs are only good for 150 days.

Alternatively, the administration could apply tariffs under Section 301, although doing so would require investigations to set the stage.

“This would take longer, likely several weeks at a minimum and probably a few months to complete several investigations,” said Phillips. “There is no limit on the level or duration of tariffs under Sec. 301.”

‘We already expect additional sectoral tariffs.’

Michelle Schulz, managing partner at Schulz Trade Law PLLC, told CNBC’s “Squawk Box Europe” on Thursday, “We have had section 301 tariffs on Chinese goods even under the previous administration, which were pretty harsh. So I can imagine that the administration will look at these provisions again and see if they can use 232, or 301, or some other mechanism whereby they can enforce the tariffs.”

According to Phillips, Section 338 enables Trump to impose tariffs of up to 50% on imports from nations that discriminate against the United States. While an available tool in the president’s kit, it has reportedly never been used before.

Finally, Section 232 tariffs — which Trump has used for steel, aluminum, and automobiles and which were unaffected by the court’s ruling — can be expanded to cover other sectors.

“We already expect additional sectoral tariffs — pharmaceuticals, semiconductors/electronics, etc. — and uncertainty regarding the IEEPA-based tariffs could lead the White House to put more emphasis on sectoral tariffs, where there is much less legal uncertainty,” said Phillips.

Blaze News reached out to the Department of Commerce for comment but did not receive a response by publication.

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

​Donald trump, Liberation day, Tariffs, Trade, Economics, Commerce, Lutnick, Trump administration, International trade, Canada, China, Mexico, Politics