Category: blaze media

Texas Democrats Jasmine Crockett and James Talarico have found themselves running against each other in the race for the Texas Senate seat — and BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales couldn’t be more entertained.

“There is a cage match a brewin’ between, I’ve got to say, two of the most libtarded people that may have ever existed,” Gonzales jokes.

“In the blue corner, you have Jasmine Crockett, the fake ghetto hood rat herself. And then in the other blue … corner, you have Texas state Representative James Talarico,” she continues, pointing out that Talarico has become the center of recent controversy after Stephen Colbert claimed an interview with the Texas politician wasn’t allowed to air on CBS.

“That’s actually not true, because CBS has already said that they did not pull Stephen Colbert’s James Talarico interview.”

“The Late Show was not prohibited by CBS from broadcasting the interview with Representative James Talarico. The show was provided legal guidance that the broadcast could trigger the FCC equal time rule for two other candidates, including Jasmine Crockett, and presented options for how the equal time for other candidates could be fulfilled,” a statement from CBS read.

“It was ‘The Late Show’ itself that decided to present the interview through its YouTube channel with on-air promotion on the broadcast rather than potentially providing the equal-time options,” the statement concluded.

“There was a lie. It’s just been, actually I think, a ploy to try and prop up this lame soy-boy candidate because the Democrats know that if their candidate is Jasmine Crockett, they’re f**ked,” Gonzales comments.

“Now, I would also argue they’re screwed either way because James Talarico is not winning U.S. Senate in the state of Texas. Like, that’s not happening. But he is less of a train wreck and he is, I guess, less embarrassing,” she continues, before showing clips of Crockett calling out Talarico for his claims.

“I think she should just accuse Stephen Colbert of being racist,” Gonzales jokes.

“’He didn’t want to have a black woman on to talk about her Senate race,’” she adds.

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

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

​Sharing, Free, Video, Camera phone, Video phone, Upload, Youtube.com, Sara gonzales unfiltered, Sara gonzales, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Democrats, Jasmine crockett, James talarico, Texas senate race, Stephen colbert, Fcc rules, President trump, The trump administration 

President Donald Trump has made abundantly clear that he is willing to attack Iran. Recent polling suggests, however, that Americans are not particularly keen on getting bogged down in another Middle Eastern conflict.

The tightrope

Trump has long been critical of his predecessors’ costly foreign entanglements, indicating both that he would end “the era of endless wars” and that it was not the job of American forces to “solve ancient conflicts in faraway lands that many people have not even heard of.”

‘Bad things will happen.’

The “peace president,” who has in recent years brokered numerous peaceful resolutions between warring parties, has been walking a tightrope with regard to Iran.

The Trump administration’s National Security Strategy noted, “We want to prevent an adversarial power from dominating the Middle East, its oil and gas supplies, and the chokepoints through which they pass while avoiding the ‘forever wars’ that bogged us down in that region at great cost.”

Despite skepticism from friends and foe alike, the administration pulled off its clinical strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities on June 22 without wavering on the tightrope.

That successful balancing act is, however, now threatened by the apparent lack of progress in America’s indirect negotiations with Iran regarding the Shia nation’s nuclear program.

The situation

Trump stated at his Board of Peace’s first meeting on Thursday that Iran “cannot continue to threaten the stability of the entire region.”

The president said that “bad things will happen” if Tehran doesn’t make a deal to limit its nuclear program — something Majid Takht-Ravanchi, Iran’s foreign minister, suggested was possible ahead of the so-far unsuccessful indirect talks this week.

RELATED: Iran strike looms as Trump hosts Board of Peace

The Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group entering the Arabian Sea on Feb. 6. Photo: U.S. Central Command

“We may have to take it a step further, or we may not. Maybe we are going to make a deal. You are going to be finding out over the next, probably, 10 days,” added Trump.

Although a decision to attack has not yet been made, Trump has clearly taken steps to ensure that it’s a viable option, assembling the greatest U.S. military air presence in the Middle East since the 2003 Iraq invasion.

U.S. officials told the Wall Street Journal that this air power would enable America to wage a weeks-long air war against Iran.

Trump has reportedly received several briefings on military options, including decapitation strikes on Iran’s political and military leaders with the goal of regime change and/or strikes on nuclear and ballistic-missile facilities.

In the meantime, Iran has reportedly been fortifying its nuclear facilities, repairing missile production sites damaged by Israel’s June surprise attack, and participating in military exercises, including naval drills with Russian forces.

The polls

A Gallup poll found two weeks ahead of the 2003 invasion of Iraq that 59% of Americans favored and 37% opposed the proposed military intervention.

After the media dutifully banged the drums of war and Bush played up the threat of weapons of mass destruction, support for war climbed to 71% by March 19, 2003, according to a poll conducted by the Washington Post and ABC News.

There is presently nowhere near that level of support for another military attack against Iran.

An SSRS/University of Maryland poll conducted earlier this month posed the question, “Do you favor or oppose the United States initiating an attack on Iran under the current circumstances?”

Altogether, 21% of respondents said they favored an attack, 49% signaled opposition, and 30% said they didn’t know.

When broken down by party affiliation, 40% of Republicans, 6% of Democrats, and 21% of independents said they favored an attack. Twenty-five percent of Republicans, 74% of Democrats, and 51% of independents said they opposed an attack.

In a follow-up, pollsters asked, “Whose interests do you think would be most advanced by a war between the U.S. and Iran?”

Only 34% of Republicans, 32% of Democrats, and 29% of independents said American interests would be most advanced.

An Economist/YouGov poll conducted between Jan. 30 and Feb. 2 similarly found that a military adventure in Iran was an unpopular prospect.

The poll found that 28% of respondents supported and 48% opposed the U.S. taking military action in Iran. Respondents who voted for Trump in 2024 were, however, majoritively (57%) supportive of an attack, with only 26% signaling opposition.

When asked about the U.S. using military force to overthrow the Iranian regime, 33% of respondents signaled support and 42% of respondents signaled opposition. Trump supporters were split 58% to 24% on the matter.

A Harvard CAPS/Harris poll of American voters revealed last month that the “Israeli-Hamas-Iran conflict” was a top concern for only 1% of respondents. Though it was apparently not regarded as a priority, 59% of respondents still said they think that the U.S. should support regime change in Iran.

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

​War, Peace, Donald trump, George w. bush, Iran, Tehran, Nuclear, Military, Intervention, Foreign entanglement, Israel, Ayatollah, Nuclear deal, Regime change, Politics 

Most guys buy their clothes too small.

It’s something I’ve noticed consistently over years spent working with guys to help them dial in their fits and refine their closets. A certain amount of my work often involves helping a guy realize that he is, simply, no longer a medium.

One of the most common shirt-tucking errors I see is what I call the mannequin look.

It’s not his fault, it’s not because he got fat, it’s just he grew as we all grow, and he didn’t update his sizing to reflect the fact that he is 31 now, not 21. Sometimes he has an inkling that this is the case, and it’s my job to help confirm his suspicions.

Stay loose

Some of it is also that we are in the long process of coming out of the decade-long slim-fit era. Guys are essentially having to retool their understanding of what proper fit means, and it means bigger than what they previously thought.

So do you have an inkling that you might be buying your clothes too small? If you have that suspicion, you already know the answer.

You are.

Embrace it. Looser shirts are better than tighter shirts anyway.

Why?

Wiggle room

Well, they are more comfortable, of course. They also look better. Lastly, they give you wiggle room for fluctuations in weight. Yes, the guy who lives in the gym hopes that his weight only fluctuates exactly how we want it to fluctuate. That would be good for all of us. However, down here on earth, things aren’t always the way we want. We can’t all live in the gym. We all have weight fluctuations.

It happens sometimes over months, sometimes over years. It’s just how it goes. If your clothes are so tight that they can’t accommodate just a few pounds of fluctuation, they are not sustainable. It’s no wonder why people have to buy new clothes all the time.

This is one of the reasons shirts were looser in the old days. People didn’t have unlimited money. Money was tight so shirts were not. A shirt needed to last as long as possible. That practicality became an aesthetic.

Comfort, flexibility, durability. That’s what you get with a looser shirt.

There is a method to the madness.

RELATED: My first sign of spring? A peach-colored OCBD

The tuck stops here

And consider this: A looser shirt is also easier to tuck.

Is it hard to tuck in your shirt?

No, not really. It isn’t rocket science or any great and difficult task. But you can do it “wrong.” And the funny thing is it’s usually the result of trying too hard.

One of the most common shirt-tucking errors I see is what I call the mannequin look. You know what I am talking about, right? It’s where the shirt is pulled really tight against the abdomen and all stuffed down the back of the pants, often cinched with a clip in the back. That’s how they style mannequins.

It looks pretty cool on an inanimate object that stands under warm lights all day, but it looks a lot less cool on a living and breathing human male moving about his day.

Watch an old movie, make note of how the guys’ shirts are tucked in when they take their jackets off. Basically their shirts will be equally tucked all the way around their bodies. They won’t be pulled back so their shirt is flush against their abdomens. Their shirts will be equally loose around their trunks, and there will basically be an equal billowing on all sides.

The proper, classic way to tuck your shirt in is to tuck equally on all sides and then pull some of the shirt up and out so you have a nice little balanced billow all around your waist. It feels better, and it looks much stronger as well. The mannequin tries to hide the billow, but the mannequin isn’t a man. Man enjoys his billow, and he enjoys it nice and good.

Editor’s note: This article is adapted from material previously published on the Fitting Room Substack.

​Men’s style, Lifestyle, Clothing, Menswear, Classic, The root of the matter 

Vice President JD Vance took a shot at Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D) of New York after an embarrassing episode from her interview at the Munich Security Conference.

The 36-year-old firebrand socialist Democrat was trying to explain her position on whether the U.S. should defend Taiwan from a possible Chinese invasion when she stumbled through about 20 seconds of silence and rambling.

‘Does anybody really believe that AOC has very thoughtful ideas about the global world order or about what the United States should do with our policy?’

“Um, you know, I think that this is such a, you know, I think that this is, this is of course a very long-standing policy of the United States,” she said.

Vance mocked and ridiculed her during his own speech at the meeting of President Donald Trump’s “Board of Peace” on Thursday.

“I knew exactly what I wanted to say, but then after the president said that I was so smart and that I didn’t want to repeat our congresswoman who froze for 20 seconds over in Munich,” he said.

“Now I’m tempted sir, just to freeze for 20 seconds and just stare at the cameras. and maybe they’ll say nice things about me like they do about Congresswoman Cortez,” he added.

Ocasio-Cortez was likely trying to grow her name recognition in order to seek higher offices, but that effort was badly damaged by her bumbling performance.

She responded on social media to Vance’s jab to try to regain some semblance of dignity.

RELATED: ‘Right out of the Marxist playbook’: Bishop Barron dismantles Ocasio-Cortez’s criticism of Western culture

“The only thing longer than my pause to think was their silence to his joke,” she wrote, adding a skull emoji.

Vance reiterated his criticism in an appearance on Fox News.

“I have seen this way too much in Washington with politicians, where they are given lines, and when you ask them to go outside the lines they were given, they completely fall apart,” he said, “because, look, does AOC — does anybody really believe that AOC has very thoughtful ideas about the global world order or about what the United States should do with our policy in Asia or our policy in Europe?”

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

​Vance vs aoc, Ocasio cortez humiliated munich, Ocasio cortez is not that smart, Foreign policy ocasio-cortez, Politics 

Amid escalating tensions over Iran’s nuclear program and a massive U.S. military buildup in the Middle East, rumors are swirling that President Trump is on the verge of authorizing military strikes against Iran in the near term, potentially leading to prolonged conflict.

But what does this mean for the United States and the Middle East?

To get some clarity, Glenn Beck is joined by his chief researcher and former Department of Defense intelligence analyst Jason Buttrill, who explains what we need to be looking for in the coming days.

“Axios is reporting: ‘Trump moving closer to a major war with Iran.’ What does that mean, Jason?” Glenn asks.

“A broader regional war is what we’re looking at here. I think it’ll be primarily an air war, the likes of which we haven’t seen since the Gulf War,” says Jason, noting that “every 12 hours or so, we’re doubling” our “military hardware” in the Middle East.

But a war with Iran will likely be “very dirty,” he warns.

For one, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf monarchies agree that Iran is a major problem in the Middle East, meaning they are likely to be “drawn into” the conflict.

However, they face a tough “conundrum,” says Jason: Right now, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries “don’t have to compete” with Iranian oil because “Iran’s portion … is sanctioned” and “not a lot of it comes out,” allowing Saudi Arabia and allies to dominate the oil market and prices. If war breaks out, however, “suddenly a scenario that’s very real” emerges where the Saudis “have to compete with Iran” on “oil prices, gas prices — everything.”

“If we are correct that the war is about to happen soon, Iran is about to go into regime survival mode, which everything that they have planned since 1979 to maintain control and power — they are now going to put those into effect,” Jason explains.

“What does that mean?” he asks.

It means Iran will likely “shut down the Strait of Hormuz” and possibly activate “sleeper cells” for attacks or sabotage.

“You better believe that the Iranians will look at all those options once this happens,” he predicts.

For the U.S., says Jason, such a war would be a “massive air campaign to take out the ability for Iran to shoot long-range missiles, to shut down the Strait of Hormuz, and to do whatever else they want.”

Even though Trump has made repeated vows to avoid prolonged U.S. military entanglements abroad, Jason says if this war happens, it’s not going to be a Venezuela situation.

“This will take a while,” he confesses.

But Glenn is conflicted. “Here’s the thing I know about Trump, though. He doesn’t do long, drawn-out war. … He knows if he gets into a long, drawn-out war, it’s going to be horrible for him — horrible. So what do you think his advisers are saying?” he asks.

To hear Jason’s in-depth response, watch the video above.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

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

​The glenn beck program, Glenn beck, Blazetv, Blaze media, Iran, War with iran, Jason buttrill 

A minor was reportedly struck by a vehicle Monday afternoon during a student-led protest against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Palm Beach County, as hundreds of high school students walked out of class and took to nearby streets.

According to the West Palm Beach Police Department, officers responded around 12:30 p.m. to a pedestrian-vehicle crash near South Wind Plaza on North Military Trail.

‘Students retain constitutional rights to … engage in peaceful protest when such expression complies with applicable law and school district policy.’

Authorities said the minor — believed to have been participating in the protest — was transported to the hospital with non-life-threatening injuries. The driver reportedly remained at the scene and cooperated with law enforcement.

Video obtained by CBS12 shows the minor lying on the pavement as police and fire rescue personnel render aid.

The incident unfolded amid coordinated walkouts involving students from at least four Palm Beach County high schools: Lake Worth Beach High School, John I. Leonard High School, Royal Palm Beach High School, and Palm Beach Lakes High School.

According to CBS12, the incident occurred in connection with the walkout at Palm Beach Lakes.

RELATED: LAPD defies Newsom: Chief refuses to enforce mask ban on ICE

Student protest in ChicagoPhoto by Jacek Boczarski/Anadolu via Getty Images

Students exited campus during school hours in protest of federal immigration enforcement policies. The demonstrations drew large crowds downtown and near major intersections.

A memorandum written by Commissioner of Education Anastasios Kamoutsas for the Florida Department of Education, released on Feb. 3, warned districts about student protests occurring during instructional time.

“Students retain constitutional rights to free expression, including the ability to engage in peaceful protest, when such expression complies with applicable law and school district policy,” Kamoutsas wrote in the memo dated February 3. “Any student whose actions are to the contrary should be appropriately disciplined.”

RELATED: ‘We do not support ICE’: Speedway gas station sparks backlash after booting Border Patrol boss

Photo of protest in HoustonPhoto by Reginald Mathalone/NurPhoto via Getty Images

The memo further directs administrators not to organize or facilitate protest activity during the school day and to address violations promptly.

Palm Beach County School District previously stated that leaving campus during school hours violates safety protocols and could result in disciplinary action.

When reached for comment, the district directed Blaze News to school police, who have not responded. Palm Beach County Police Department declined a request for comment.

Authorities have not released additional details about how the crash occurred or whether any citations were issued.

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

​Politics, Anti-ice, Protest, Student, School system, Student protests 

President Donald Trump said that former President Barack Obama revealed classified information when he made comments that appeared to confirm the existence of extraterrestrial aliens.

Obama made the comments during an interview with Bryan Tyler Cohen, and they quickly went viral on social media, though both he and Trump had previously spoken about the possibility of aliens.

‘He’s not supposed to be doing that. He made a big mistake. He took it out of classified information.’

On Thursday, Trump was questioned by Peter Doocy of Fox News, when he appeared to confirm that Obama had spilled classified information.

“Barack Obama said that aliens are real. Have you seen any evidence of non-human visitors to Earth?” Doocy asked the president while they were both on Air Force One.

“Well, he gave classified information. He’s not supposed to be doing that,” Trump replied.

“So aliens are real?” Doocy asked.

“I don’t know if they’re real or not,” Trump responded. “I can tell you he gave classified information. He’s not supposed to be doing that. He made a big mistake. He took it out of classified information.”

He went on to say that he never talks about classified information about aliens and doesn’t have an opinion about the topic.

“I may get him out of trouble by declassifying,” he joked.

Obama referred to the famous Area 51 facility in Roswell, New Mexico, in his interview.

“They’re real, but I haven’t seen them,” said Obama about aliens.

“There’s no underground facility, unless there’s this enormous conspiracy and they hid it from the president of the United States.”

RELATED: Astronomers shocked to ‘discover the impossible’ from new telescope images: ‘I nearly spit out my coffee’

Obama walked his comments back after they went viral.

“I was trying to stick with the spirit of the speed round, but since it’s gotten attention let me clarify. Statistically, the universe is so vast that the odds are good there’s life out there,” he added.

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

​Trump vs obama, Obama on extraterrestrial aliens, Trump on extraterrestrial aliens, Us govt on aliens, Politics 

A new report from CNN host Pamela Brown examining what she describes as the rise of “Christian nationalism” is drawing fierce criticism from BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales — who is disturbed by the concerted effort to discredit Christianity.

“For the past several months, I’ve been working on a special project examining the growing influence of Christian nationalism in America. If you’re not familiar, Christian nationalism is an ideology rooted in the belief that our country was founded as a Christian nation and that our laws and institutions should reflect Christian values,” Brown reported.

“I’d imagine she makes a s**t-ton more money than me to stand there and lie to the American people and try to gaslight them and try to explain to them why Christianity is evil,” BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales comments.

“Do I need to bring up the Pledge of Allegiance? You know, the thing that you guys are trying to get us to not say in schools because it says that dastardly word ‘under God.’ Can’t have that. And somehow this woman Pamela Brown has spent several months — several months! — just scratching her head trying to research a way to gaslight America into thinking that these basic founding principles never existed,” she continues.

“Now you might be thinking, ‘Boy, that’s sh***y.’ And it is. But I regret to inform you, it gets worse,” she adds.

The mainstream media are not only attempting to bury the Christian values our nation was founded on, but they’re attempting to make Charlie Kirk “the villain in the afterlife.”

“Now they’re like, ‘Well, his death is being used as a launching point for this evil Christianity movement,’” Gonzales says, before playing another clip of Pamela Brown explaining her “research.”

“With the assassination of Charlie Kirk last year, experts say it was a pivotal moment for the movement and an occasion where the tragedy of his loss unified Christian nationalists and the Trump administration as they honored him,” Brown reported.

In an interview Brown shared with “expert” Matthew Taylor, he claimed that the “memorial service was one of the most potent examples of this shift in our culture that we’re experiencing right now.”

Taylor went on to lament that a “large segment of American Christians are being activated by these ideas — radicalized by these ideas that say that they are the persecuted ones and that they need to stand up for Christians’ rights.”

“Are you denying that Christians are constantly targeted in this country? Have you forgotten? Have you forgotten how the Biden administration actually went after Christians? Like, sir, are you living on this planet?” Gonzales asks.

“We’ve got all of these transgenders, and when they feel like they are being persecuted or oppressed, even though they’re not — it’s the mental delusion — they actually go out and kill people,” she continues. “What did we do? What did we do that day?”

“I was in that stadium. … We gathered there not just to celebrate Charlie’s life, but to celebrate Jesus. That’s not radical at all,” she adds.

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

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

​Video phone, Upload, Free, Video, Camera phone, Sharing, Youtube.com, Sara gonzales unfiltered, Sara gonzales, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Cnn, Christian nationalism, Hit piece, Christianity, Trump, Charlie kirk, Charlie kirk memorial, Charlie kirk assassination, Pamela brown cnn 

A Tennessee pastor has been indicted on horrific charges related to the alleged abuse of a child in Memphis, after another pastor was convicted on similar allegations.

The mother of the child told WHBQ-TV that Martineous Tyler was the second pastor from the same church arrested in connection to alleged sexual abuse of her child.

‘It wasn’t enough time, because I don’t think it’s enough time in the world to give somebody for a crime like this.’

The mother, who wanted to remain unidentified, said her son first met Tyler in 2024 when he went to work for him at his businesses, the Memphis Obituary Company and Tyler’s Graphics and Printing.

“He liked doing graphic design, and the guy has a business, so he used to take him to the business to print out things and get little orders together; he liked that,” said the mother.

Another pastor by the name of Demarcus Smith was charged with sex crimes in 2025 involving the woman’s son after she looked at her son’s phone.

“When I opened it up, my heart shattered,” she said.

She said that she had found nude photos and sexual conversations on her son’s phone and called the police.

Then she discovered that Smith had previously been in prison for a conviction related to his coercing a boy to send him sexually explicit photographs of himself. Smith had been a pastor during that time, and when he was released from prison in 2023, he became a pastor at the same church as Tyler.

WHBQ reported that social media indicated Smith had preached at a “Clergy Appreciation Celebration” in Sept. 2024 at the Jordan River Missionary Baptist Church.

On Feb. 10, Tyler was indicted on state charges of aggravated sexual exploitation of a minor and human trafficking. His bail was set at $200,000.

RELATED: Man who brought Happy Meal to buy 11-year-old girl for sex slavery to be deported after decades in prison

Smith was sentenced to 30 years in prison after pleading guilty to the newest federal charges in May 2025.

“It wasn’t enough time, because I don’t think it’s enough time in the world to give somebody for a crime like this,” said the boy’s mother.

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

​Memphis pastor sexual assault, Child trafficking pastors, Martineous tyler, Damarcus smith, Crime 

A grandmother named Forlesia Cook stole the show at the White House Black History Month reception on Wednesday while praising President Donald Trump’s anti-crime policies.

Cook told critics to back off the president and thanked him for sending federal troops into Washington, D.C., to quell the crime there.

‘When is she running for office? Forlesia, when are you running for office? You have my endorsement.’

“One thing I like about him: He keeps it real, just like Grandma,” said Cook. “I appreciate that, because I can trust him because he tells exactly how he feels and what he thinks.”

The audience at the White House applauded loudly for Cook’s speech.

“Thank God for this president! I am filled. My cup runneth over! Because he allowed his … people to come to my house … to talk about the murder of my grandson. It seemed like nobody cared,” she continued.

“Nobody heard me, Democrats … until this Republican,” Cook said.

She said that the president had invited her twice to go before Congress and testify in favor of his crime policies.

“I love him. I don’t want to hear nothing you’ve got to say about that racist stuff,” she continued.

“And don’t be looking at me on the news, hating on me because I’m standing up for somebody that deserves to be stood up for. Get off the man’s back! Let him do his job! He’s doing the right thing! Back up off him!” she added.

“And Grandma said it!” she concluded.

The president jokingly asked Cook to run for office after the rousing speech.

“Wow, that’s pretty good,” Trump said. “When is she running for office? Forlesia, when are you running for office, please? You have my endorsement.”

The White House posted video of Cook’s comments to its official social media account.

RELATED: Morgan Freeman says Black History Month and the term ‘African-American’ are an ‘insult’

Trump went on to note the passing of activist Jesse Jackson, whom he called a “real hero” with real “street smarts.”

Cook’s grandson Marty William McMillan Jr. was gunned down in 2017 by a man who found him in bed with his significant other. The killer was sentenced to 16 years in prison for voluntary manslaughter and for tampering with evidence.

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

​Forlesia cook speech, Black grandma speech, White house black history month reception, Trump on black history, Politics 

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr accused “The Late Show” host Stephen Colbert and Democrat Senate candidate James Talarico of spreading a “hoax” about their interview segment.

Colbert claimed during his Monday-night show that the FCC’s new guidance on the equal time rule forced CBS to block Talarico from appearing on his program.

‘This was a decision by Colbert, by Talarico to put a hoax out there that they knew the media would run for purposes of Talarico, apparently, scoring political points against Jasmine Crockett.’

“[Talarico] was supposed to be here, but we were told in no uncertain terms by our network’s lawyers, who called us directly, that we could not have him on the broadcast,” Colbert told his viewers.

CBS released a statement explaining that Colbert’s show was “provided legal guidance” that broadcasting the interview “could trigger the FCC equal-time rule for two other candidates” running against Talarico for the U.S. Senate seat in Texas. The network stated that it “presented options for how the equal time for other candidates could be fulfilled,” but that Colbert’s team instead “decided to present the interview through its YouTube channel.”

During a Thursday episode of “The Glenn Beck Program,” Glenn Beck asked Carr whether the FCC had provided any legal guidance to CBS concerning the interview. Carr insisted the FCC had not.

He told Beck, “I woke up Tuesday morning and logged onto social media, and that was the first time that I’d even heard about this. And I woke up to a politician claiming that the FCC had somehow not aired — is what they said — the FCC refused to air this segment, and that wasn’t true at all.”

“Not only was that not true, but the subsequent claim that it was CBS that refused to air it was also proved to be a hoax as well,” Carr continued. “In fact, CBS, apparently, had advised Colbert they could run the exact interview that they wanted, and they just needed to be mindful that it could trigger an equal time obligation for other candidates.”

RELATED: Stephen Colbert melts down after CBS pulls interview with Democrat just months before his show ends

Stephen Colbert. Photo by Scott Kowalchyk/CBS via Getty Images

He accused Colbert of running a “hoax,” arguing that “he knew he could fool … the legacy media by claiming he was censored.”

Carr speculated that the alleged trick aimed to give Talarico “a leg up” on his Democrat opponent, Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas.

“This was a decision by Colbert, by Talarico to put a hoax out there that they knew the media would run for purposes of Talarico, apparently, scoring political points against Jasmine Crockett,” Carr told Beck.

RELATED: ‘The View’ under investigation for potential violations, says Trump’s FCC chief

“The View.” Photo by Lou Rocco/American Broadcasting Companies Inc. via Getty Images

Beck also questioned Carr about “The View” after reports surfaced that the show is facing an FCC investigation for possible equal time violations.

Carr explained that “The View” has argued that it is a “bona fide” news program, meaning that it should be exempt from the equal time rule, which would allow the ABC program to have a political candidate on the show without providing an equal opportunity to other candidates running in the same election.

Carr insisted that “The View” has “not made the case to the FCC that they do, in fact, qualify for the exception to the rule.”

“And so we have started an enforcement inquiry, taking enforcement actions to explore this issue with them and move forward,” he stated, adding that the FCC is “actively looking” at the show’s claim that it is a bona fide news program.

CBS, ABC, Talarico’s campaign, and representatives for “The Late Show,” “The View,” and Colbert did not respond to a request for comment.

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

​News, Abc, Cbs, Stephen colbert, Federal communications commission, Fcc, Brendan carr, The view, The late show, James talarico, Equal time rule, Equal time, Politics 

When late-night host Stephen Colbert told viewers CBS wouldn’t air his interview with Texas Democrat James Talarico due to FCC pressure from President Trump, the segment’s ratings went through the roof on YouTube.

The problem with this is that while Talarico championed their forbidden interview, it turned out that Trump had nothing to do with the FCC pressure.

“He is getting a lot of good press in this moment. This quote-unquote ‘forbidden’ interview that he had with Stephen Colbert is working really well for him,” BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey says on “Relatable.”

“On Monday night, February 16, during a segment of ‘The Late Show,’ Stephen Colbert told his audience that the show’s parent company, CBS, was stopping him from airing this pre-recorded interview that he had done with Talarico, due to pressure from the FCC,” she explains.

Colbert then pointed his audience to YouTube to watch the interview.

“So saying, ‘This is a big forbidden interview. Trump doesn’t want you to see this,’ it’s brilliant marketing. Both in the actual interview and in the promotion afterward, Colbert and Talarico reinforced that narrative, saying that, ‘Hey, Trump, really, really, doesn’t want you to hear what this guy has to say,’” Stuckey says.

“This is the party that ran against cancel culture, and now they’re trying to control what we watch, what we say, what we read. And this is the most dangerous kind of cancel culture — the kind that comes from the top. They went after ‘The View’ because I went on there. They went after Jimmy Kimmel for telling a joke they didn’t like. They went after you for telling the truth about Paramount’s bribe to Donald Trump,” Talarico said in the “forbidden” interview with Colbert.

And in a post on X, Talarico wrote, “This is the interview Donald Trump didn’t want you to see. His FCC refused to air my interview with Stephen Colbert. Trump is worried we’re about to flip Texas.”

“The problem is it’s fiction,” Stuckey comments. “It’s not true. The FCC — what they’re doing — this has nothing to do with Trump. They are enforcing a rule that has existed for a long time — that’s been around for almost a century — that says that you have to give equal airtime to a politician who is running, to their opponent.”

“Colbert and Talarico made it sound like the Trump administration is controlling free speech, but what the FCC is actually doing is just encouraging the networks — requiring that the networks actually give equal opportunity to all candidates,” she explains.

“So in this case, it’s not that the FCC is actually saying, ‘Hey, you’ve got to get Ken Paxton or another Republican on here.’ They’re saying in this case that he needs to have Jasmine Crockett on and Jasmine Crockett needs to have an equivalent time to also promote her campaign,” she continues.

“So this doesn’t even really have to do with Republican versus Democrat,” she adds.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Sharing, Free, Video, Camera phone, Video phone, Upload, 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, President trump, Fcc, James talarico, Stephen colbert 

Two Democrat members of Congress are pushing legislation that would enact a “Bill of Rights” for transgender-identifying people.

Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) said the bill would combat the “cruelty” of policies of the Trump administration and other Republicans.

‘She’s a toxic person who is damaging our country.’

“The resolution creates a comprehensive framework to protect trans and nonbinary Americans from discrimination on the basis of gender identity or expression,” read a press release about the bill.

The bill would change the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in order to “explicitly include gender identity and sex characteristics” and add protections in federal education laws for trans-identifying students. It would also reinforce the right of transgender-identifying people to access health care for their gender identity and would ban “conversion therapy.”

The bill was widely opposed and ridiculed by many on social media.

“What civil rights do ADULT trans people currently lack?! This is just a slippery slope to reach the kids. Absolutely not,” read one response.

“We don’t need her demanding a bill of rights for transgender people. She’s a toxic person who is damaging our country,” wrote another critic.

“The bill of rights is the same for all Americans regardless of race or gender. There is no special treatment for gender confusion,” said another X user.

“The Dems cannot define a woman, but they can do this!?!?! Now you know this is just made up to have some undermining influence on America’s history!” wrote another detractor.

Jayapal has said previously that she is the “proud mother of a transgender child.”

RELATED: USA Today obliterated online over bizarre claim about transgender athletes

Rep. Sara Jacobs (D) of California also issued a statement in favor of the bill.

“We need protections for the transgender and nonbinary communities at the federal level, because no one should live in fear of being who they are,” she wrote. “I’m so proud to co-lead the Transgender Bill of Rights as proof of our commitment to protect the health, safety, and well-being of trans people in this country. To the trans community: We see you, and we will not stop until you can live freely and authentically.”

Democrats are unlikely to gain support for the bill, as both houses of Congress are controlled by Republicans, but their chances may improve if they make enough gains in the midterm elections. However, the bill would still need to be signed by the president, which is very unlikely.

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

​Transgender bill of rights, Rep pramila jayapal on trans, Transgender agenda, Democrats on trans, Politics 

A short film made entirely with artificial intelligence has viewers up in arms and saying they are willing to boycott theaters that show it.

The film is reportedly set to be shown in thousands of theaters across the United States after winning an AI film festival.

‘Even for AI slop this is bad.’

The short in question is called “Thanksgiving Day,” made by Igor Alferov.

As reported by AI Films Studio, the winner of the Frame Forward AI film festival was left to a public vote, with the grand prize of getting a full theatrical run across 14,000 screens in 2,300 theaters.

Deadline announced “Thanksgiving Day” as the festival’s inaugural winner on Tuesday and confirmed that it would receive a two-week run in theaters through Screenvision Media.

However, movie fans were none too pleased to hear that news.

Spoilers for the short film are listed below.

The film, which features a bear and a duck in a seemingly Soviet-inspired spaceship, has the animal astronauts being exploited by various space thugs, which are also animals. A space cop beaver extorts the pair for money. Then, a pig, who is seemingly an environmental inspector, takes even more money before a rat “quarantine zone inspector” takes all their food.

Finally, a space turkey stops by and restocks the travelers’ fridge for Thanksgiving.

RELATED: AI bots are hiring humans now. Next stop: Slaves by choice?

The two-minute film received near-unanimously negative responses on YouTube, which included comments like “literal slop” and “I hated every second of that.”

“If I see this or another other ai slop before my movie im going to the front desk and getting a refund and leaving [sic],” another viewer wrote.

“Even for AI slop this is bad,” a user named Davie Jones wrote, while yet another unhappy audience member said, “this is complete garbage dude.”

On X, a lone commenter replied to Deadline with one word:

“Pathetic.”

Multiple (unconfirmed) reports have surfaced online citing that AMC would be one of the theater chains showing the short before movie trailers air.

RELATED: My school’s AI challenge raised a scary question: What do students need me for?

Photo by Kevin Carter/Getty Images

While AMC has seemingly not announced this, and it is unclear where the claim derives from, it is true that AMC partners with Screenvision Media. On its website, Screenvision Media notes that its partnership officer signed a long-term contract with AMC as one of its 10 largest exhibitor partners.

This rumor prompted users to discuss possible boycotts of AMC online.

X user Nate Leport said he would “drive the extra 20 minutes” to a different theater after reading the claim.

“We need to protest at every” AMC in the country, another user suggested.

“I would rather have out of place feeling local business ads than this to be honest,” Jackie wrote.

Finally, Matthew wrote on X, “Upon reading this I will no longer go to your theaters for anything.”

Return reached out to AMC about the overwhelmingly negative response and asked if the theater chain plans to air the short film or any other AI films. This article will be updated with any applicable responses.

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

​Return, Ai, Artificial intelligence, Movies, Film, Movie theaters, Boycott, Amc, Tech 

Five Franciscan friars who traveled from Spain in the late 16th century to what is now Georgia were savagely murdered for defending the dignity of the sacrament of marriage. They are now well on their way to sainthood.

Monsignor Fred Nijem, drawing from the notes of Fr. Conrad Harkins — the vice-postulator for the canonization cause of the Georgia Martyrs — explained in Southern Cross magazine that “the missionaries met their death near present-day Darien. The reason for their death was their defense of the sanctity of marriage. The catalyst for their death was their refusal to allow a Catholic to take a second wife.”

‘They gave explicit and immediate witness of fidelity to Christ.’

According to the official website for the Georgia Martyrs, the friars lived for years with the coastal Indians of the Guale territory, learning their language, preaching the gospel, and welcoming many into the faith.

Among the coastal converts was a man named Juanillo, next in line to become tribal chief.

Friar Pedro de Corpa challenged the newly minted Christian’s decision to take a second wife, vowing to oppose his rise to power if he persisted in his polygamic choice. The Indian evidently did not appreciate this challenge to his power.

Msgr. Nijem indicated that:

Juanillo left the mission and returned under cover of darkness, and bludgeoned Fr. Pedro to death, and impaled his severed head at the mission landing. The remaining four missionaries were also killed. The Guales had decided to dispatch all the “troublesome friars,” who interfered with them having many wives.

All of the nearby friars were brutally murdered except for Friar Francisco de Avila, who was kidnapped and tortured until St. Augustine’s governor managed to secure his release — 10 months later. Despite the cruelty he suffered at the hands of the Indians, de Avila refused to testify against them at trial in order to spare their lives.

RELATED: ‘Pure bigotry’: CNN fearmongers about ‘Christian nationalism’ in election-narrative tease

St. Francis of Assisi. Photo by: Bildagentur-online/Universal Images Group via Getty Images.

Prior to his death, Pope Francis recognized the murdered men of the Order of Friars Minor — four of whom were priests — as martyrs whose slayings were committed out of hatred for the Catholic faith.

The Vatican’s Dicastery for the Causes of Saints recently announced that the Georgia Martyrs — Friars Pedro de Corpa, Blas Rodríguez de Cuacos, Miguel de Añón, and Francisco de Veráscola as well as lay brother Antonio de Badajoz — will be beatified at a ceremony in Savannah, Georgia, on Oct. 31.

An English translation of the dicastery’s announcement notes that “aware of the risks connected to the apostolate, they gave explicit and immediate witness of fidelity to Christ and His message by fully transmitting the teaching of the Church.”

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops notes on its website that “all Christians are called to be saints. Saints are persons in heaven (officially canonized or not), who lived heroically virtuous lives, offered their life for others, or were martyred for the faith, and who are worthy of imitation.”

Where official recognition by the Catholic Church goes, there are three steps to sainthood.

First, a candidate who “lived a heroically virtuous life or offered their life” is recognized by the pope as “venerable.” The second stage is beatification, which requires a finding of “one miracle acquired through the candidate’s intercession.” Finally, for canonization, a second miracle is required.

The UCCB noted, however, that “the pope may waive these requirements. A miracle is not required prior to a martyr’s beatification, but one is required before canonization.”

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

​Faith, Religion, Catholic, Church, Martyr, Martyrdom, Georgia, Savannah, Georgia martyrs, Friar, Franciscan, Murder, Sainthood, Saint, Beatifcation, Politics 

While Texas politicians are adamant about banning Sharia law in Texas, BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales points out that it’s actually not necessary — because Islamic practices are already illegal in America.

“Sharia is already against the law. The way that they govern is already against the law. Islamic law is not the U.S. Constitution. Islamic law is not Texas law. That’s very obvious. You’re not allowed to amputate someone’s hand for stealing,” Gonzales explains.

“Can’t stone a woman to death because she was unfaithful. They can do that there. You can’t do that over here. You can’t throw someone off a building because they’re gay. They do that over there. Not so much over here. You’re not allowed to kill Christians because you think they’re infidels. Like, that’s why Islam isn’t compatible with our country,” she continues.

And Gonzales has made it her “personal goal” to do “whatever is necessary to make the state of Texas the most unfriendly, unwelcoming state to Islam, because it is not here to be friendly or welcoming to us.”

What she actually believes would be “key to stopping the Islamic takeover” is halal meat.

“So in the Quran, you have halal and haram. … Halal means, basically, allowed, permissible. So halal is allowed. Haram is not allowed. Okay? So one’s good, one’s bad,” Gonzales explains.

“And generally, Muslims are only supposed to eat halal food and halal-certified meat,” she continues, noting that pork is one meat considered “haram.”

“And it can only be certified halal if the slaughterer, who has to be Muslim, if the slaughterer participates in this Islamic prayer ritual while he slits the throat of the animal, and it has to hit arteries, and it’s this whole big thing that they have to let the animal bleed out entirely,” she says.

“Now, the thing is, is that animals in this country have to be stunned before slaughter. So they do this so that the animal can’t feel the pain. It’s supposed to be more humane — except there’s a religious exemption, obviously for Muslims or any other religion who want to take that up,” she continues.

“That is why I’m asking Republicans: If you are serious about stopping the Islamic invasion, ban halal meat. Just do it. Ban it,” she adds.

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

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

​Sharing, Video, Camera phone, Video phone, Upload, Free, Youtube.com, Come and take it with sara gonzales, Sara gonzales unfiltered, Sara gonzales, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Islamic, Islamic invasion, Islamic state, Texas, Sharia law, Halal food, Come and take it 

Over 100,000 students have already applied after the explosive launch of Texas School Choice — which Gov. Greg Abbott (R) calls “the biggest and best rollout of school choice in the history of the United States of America.”

“And it’s really a gamechanger for education in our state. You know, one thing about school choice is it provides school competition,” Abbott tells Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck on “The Glenn Beck Program.”

“What we want to see is competition in public education, private education, homeschool education. And when we have that, it is going to lead to better educational products for all the kids in the state of Texas,” he continues.

“And listen, if this can be done in the state of Texas, there is a lot of talk that this could sweep across the United States and truly transform education in the country,” he adds.

“Can you tell me either the demographics, or the income brackets, that are mostly benefiting from this? Because there’s people who say this is going to benefit the rich,” Glenn comments.

“I’m laughing because all those talking points are nothing more than the teacher union talking points,” Abbott laughs.

“There are, income wise, three different buckets for school choice in the state of Texas. The first would be low income, which would be capped at 200% of the poverty level. The second bucket would be the gap between the 200% poverty level to the 500% poverty level. And then the third would be anybody above the 500% poverty level,” he explains.

“And what we have in applicants so far out of about 100,000, they break down pretty evenly among those three different income levels,” he adds.

However, Glenn is still curious as to how exactly this will create competition between public schools.

“Public schools have had a monopoly on educating kids in the state of Texas, and they didn’t have to get up every day and find a way to compete and provide a better education product for their kids. They didn’t have to pay as much attention in the classroom and in doing what needed to be done to truly provide the kind of product that parents look forward to taking their child to every single day,” Abbott explains.

“Now, however, with a robust school choice program that’s being oversubscribed, which means that it may be expanding in the future, it means that public schools, they’re going to have to get back to the basics,” he continues, adding, “They’re going to have to provide the quality of education that will lead to a child actually learning.”

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.

​Sharing, Video, Video phone, Camera phone, Upload, Free, Youtube.com, The glenn beck program, Glenn beck, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Greg abbott, Texas, Texas school choice 

In the late 20th century, we entered Marshall McLuhan’s global village, in which instant communications collapsed distances and weakened the boundaries of the nation-state. We are now entering its next chapter, a lifting of the internet’s physical backbone above terrestrial soil. Blue Origin’s TeraWave project is a manifestation of what Manuel Castells called the “space of flows”: a domain in which social practices occur in real time, indifferent to geographic contiguity. By moving critical infrastructure into orbit, we are creating a planetary nervous system that transcends the old constraints of territory.

An attack on a private communication satellite could constitute an act of war.

What does it mean when that network is physically located in the global commons of space, beyond the reach of any nation’s laws? Communications that once passed through national gateways now beam directly from overhead, challenging the ability of governments to control information flows within their own borders.

Geopolitical lifelines — and severance

Control over communications infrastructure is a strategic advantage. On the very first day of World War I, British forces cut the undersea telegraph cables linking Germany to the outside world, save one cable, which they tapped. This cable-cutting gambit isolated an empire and yielded intelligence coups, such as the Zimmermann telegram, that influenced the course of the war. Networks are a geopolitical lifeline, and to control them or deny them to an adversary is an exercise of power.

The Cold War moved this struggle into the skies. In 1964, the United States led the formation of Intelsat to project soft power through global television and telephone links. The Soviet Union, wary of an American-dominated system, responded in 1971 with Intersputnik. Even as these satellites orbited above Earth’s politics, they were enmeshed in them.

Technology is now catching up to the strategic ambition. While early attempts in the 1990s, such as Motorola’s Iridium, struggled economically, the 2020s brought a drop in launch costs that made massive constellations feasible. SpaceX’s Starlink proved the concept, deploying thousands of satellites to become the world’s largest operator by 2025.

Weaving the orbital fiber

TeraWave is Blue Origin’s bid for the terabit-scale backbone. The system is not designed for the mass-market consumer but is instead a “provider for providers,” an infrastructure as a service for telecom companies, large enterprises, and governments. The technical blueprint calls for a multilayered architecture of satellites: 5,280 in low Earth orbit to interface with ground users and 128 larger satellites in medium Earth orbit acting as high-capacity relay nodes.

RELATED: Amazon’s Ring is running a spy ring from your home. Here’s how to turn it off.

Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images

TeraWave and Starlink serve different purposes. Starlink is an access network, a wireless ISP from space. TeraWave is “orbital fiber,” a point-to-point, symmetric link for the heavy-duty data needs of data centers and military command posts. Each customer link can access up to 144 Gbps, while the MEO layer provides trunk connections of up to six terabits per second.

To achieve this bandwidth, TeraWave pushes into the Q and V radio frequency bands, which allow high throughput but require precise, power-hungry ground antennas and remain susceptible to atmospheric attenuation. It also employs optical inter-satellite links to create a laser-based network. Blue Origin’s founder, Jeff Bezos, has opted for a methodical engineering approach that separates backhaul from access, perhaps learning from the single-stack complexities of SpaceX’s pioneering forays.

The ultimate high ground

In space, private innovation meets the hard edge of national security. We saw this in Ukraine, for which Starlink became a digital lifeline after terrestrial networks were disrupted by the Russian invasion. Ukrainian troops used Starlink to coordinate defense and control drones, nullifying attempts to sever their communications. When Elon Musk reportedly curtailed coverage near a conflict zone, citing fears of escalation, the U.S. Department of Defense found itself negotiating contracts to ensure service continuity.

China has announced its own GuoWang mega-constellation of 12,000 satellites to ensure that it is not dependent on Western systems. The European Union has approved its IRIS² initiative to achieve European strategic autonomy and avoid reliance on non-European players. India now requires satellite operators to route data through local ground gateways to protect national security and comply with data localization laws. The transnational nature of these networks is in constant tension with the territorial jurisdiction of states.

Vulnerable in the void

The orbital backbone has a certain resilience, providing route diversity: the ability to act as backup if undersea cables are cut, a real concern given recent incidents of sabotage in Northern Europe and Asia. TeraWave is explicitly marketed as a way to keep critical services online during disasters or outages. For smaller states or enterprises, these networks reduce exposure to local infrastructure attacks.

The stakes in space are high. If conflict extends to orbit, a cascading debris field could indiscriminately knock out the satellites. As militaries integrate TeraWave into their operations, these satellites may become targets, blurring the lines between civilian and military assets. An attack on a private communication satellite could constitute an act of war.

Benefit or Babel?

Low Earth orbit is largely ungoverned. International frameworks lag behind the current technical reality. There is no binding treaty on how many satellites one company can deploy. The lines of accountability are blurred. If a nation’s internet is provided by a private corporation’s satellites, is that nation’s infrastructure still its own?

Blue Origin’s slogan for TeraWave is “For the Benefit of Earth.” It’s a noble sentiment, but achieving it will require more than engineering. It will require wisdom that matches the scale of the technology. We are wrapping the Earth in a collective nervous system; whether this yields a harmonious village or a Tower of Babel is yet to be determined.

​Tech 

The latest musical release from U2 laments the death of Renee Good, the anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement protester who was shot and killed by a federal agent after she swerved her car into him in Minneapolis last month.

The popular group has not released new music since 2017, and lead singer, Bono, said the surprise release of the songs on the EP was necessary to capture the moment.

‘They are songs of defiance and dismay, of lamentation.’

“These songs were impatient to be out in the world,” the singer said. “They are songs of defiance and dismay, of lamentation. Songs of celebration will follow, we’re working on those now.”

The lyrics of “American Obituary” condemn the shooting that was captured on video and left Good dead.

“Renee Good, born to die free. American mother of three. Seventh day, January. A bullet for each child, you see,” Bono sings.

“The color of her eye. 930 Minneapolis. To desecrate domestic bliss. Three bullets blast, three babies kissed. Renee the domestic terrorist?” he continues.

The chorus sings, “America will rise against the people of the lie.”

The other songs on the EP address the Russian war against Ukraine, the Israeli-Gaza conflict, and the lethal crackdowns on protesters by the Iranian regime. One track that features a guest performance by Ed Sheeran will be released with a documentary recognizing the fourth anniversary of the invasion of Ukraine.

Bono says the future full album release will have more songs with a “joyful tone.”

RELATED: Shocking cellphone video of Minneapolis shooting from ICE agent’s perspective released

Bono has used his platform to support philanthropic efforts and has reluctantly admitted that the best way to help impoverished communities is to bring jobs by way of expanding capitalism.

“I ended up as an activist in a very different place from where I started. I thought that if we just redistributed resources, then we could solve every problem. I now know that’s not true,” he said in an interview in 2022.

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

​Renee good death, Ice kill protester, Bono of u2, U2 protest song, Political 

Former Victoria’s Secret CEO and Bath & Body Works co-founder Leslie Wexner was questioned at his Ohio home on Wednesday by Democrat members of the House Oversight Committee over his relationship to child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

The 88-year-old billionaire said in a prepared statement that he has “been the subject of outrageous untrue statements and hurtful rumor, innuendo, and speculation,” adding that he was “naive, foolish, and gullible to put any trust in Jeffrey Epstein.”

Although he has not been charged with any crime, Wexner was identified in the newly released Epstein files — both in a 2019 FBI document and an FBI email — as a possible co-conspirator in Epstein’s sex-trafficking case.

Denial

Wexner, whose net worth is presently estimated to be $10.8 billion, told lawmakers that he was introduced to Epstein in the 1980s by Bob Meister, the former vice chairman of the insurance giant Aon.

‘Taunting and poking him with impatience, that little demon he really loves.’

After allegedly receiving references for Epstein from two of the pedophile’s former superiors at Bear Stearns and Élie de Rothschild of the Rothschild family banking dynasty, Wexner developed a relationship with Epstein, then ultimately hired him to manage his personal finances.

The New York Times reported that during the time he managed Wexner’s personal finances, Epstein not only became extraordinarily rich but came into the possession of a New York mansion, a private plane, and a luxury estate in Ohio, altogether valued at roughly $100 million and all previously owned by Wexner or one of his companies. Wexner told lawmakers on Wednesday that Epstein purchased the New York property from him for what he “was told was the appraised value.”

Wexner noted in his prepared statement that Epstein “was clever, diabolical, and a master manipulator” — a deceiver living a “double life” who “carefully used his acquaintance with important individuals to curate an aura of legitimacy that he then used to expand his network of acquaintances, and apparent credibility, even farther.”

The billionaire claims that he was only personally acquainted with the one side of Epstein — the “sophisticated financial guru,” not the “side of Epstein’s life for which he is now infamous.”

Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre alleged in court documents that she had been trafficked to Wexner, according to multiple outlets. Wexner, however, claimed both that he has never been unfaithful to Abigail, his wife of 33 years, and that he completely severed ties with Epstein around the time of the pedophile’s guilty plea in 2008 for solicitation of a minor for prostitution.

RELATED: ‘I wasn’t his girlfriend’: Whoopi Goldberg breaks silence on her presence in the Epstein files

Photo by Joe Schildhorn/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images

Wexner claimed in 2019 that he had severed ties with the sex offender a year earlier, in 2007.

Wexner stressed in his statement to lawmakers that while he was “conned,” he has “done nothing wrong.”

Following the deposition, Rep. Robert Garcia (Calif.), the top Democrat on the Oversight Committee, stated, “There was no one more involved in providing Jeffrey Epstein with the wealth and financial support he needed to commit his crimes than Les Wexner. There would be no Epstein Island, no Epstein plane, and no money to traffic women and girls without the wealth of Les Wexner.”

“And yet, with all this evidence, Mr. Wexner admitted that the FBI and DOJ never questioned him,” continued Garcia. “That’s outrageous and unforgivable.”

A Wexner spokesperson said in a statement obtained by Politico that the billionaire “honestly answered every question put to him today by the Committee” and that “Wexner reiterated that he has no knowledge of, and did not participate in, Epstein’s illegal conduct.”

Another malicious spirit

Epstein may not have been the first “master manipulator” to exert influence on Wexner.

In an interview that served as the basis for Julie Baumgold’s August 1985 profile in New York Magazine, Wexner discussed “his dybbuk, which pokes and prods and gives him the itchiness of soul that he calls shpilkes.”

According to Jewish folklore, a dybbuk is an evil human spirit whose past sins preclude it from finding peace. These spirits are believed to seek refuge in the bodies of living human beings whom they cling to and/or possess.

Rabbi Julian Sinclair, writing for the Jewish Chronicle, noted that “Kabbalistic works, at least from the 16th century onwards, sometimes contain instructions and protocols for the exorcism of dybbuks, ceremonies to drive them out of the bodies they have colonised.”

Baumgold wrote that when Wexner was a boy, his father called the dybbuk “tummel, a churning, so he feels ‘molten’ and unformed, pricked by these spiritual pins and needles.”

“[Wexner] met this demon again when he was 40 and already worth half a billion,” continued Baumgold, “when he climbed the mountain in front of his house in Vail and almost froze to death and decided to change his life. This demon he calls ‘terminal shpilkes,’ which makes him wander from house to house, repeating the pattern of his childhood on a luxurious scale, wanting more, swallowing companies larger than his own. It is precisely the reason that Wexner has a billion and didn’t stop at, say, 5 million and a new Mercedes every other year and what he calls ‘normal life.'”

The profile concludes with:

Lex Wexner picks up his heavy black case and flies off in his Challenger, with his dybbuk sitting next to him, taunting and poking him with impatience, that little demon he really loves. The dybbuk turns his face. What does he look like? “Me,” says Les Wexner.

Journalist Whitney Webb suggested that while “one may interpret this use of shpilkes, literally ‘pins’ or ‘spikes’ in Yiddish and often used to describe nervous energy, impatience, or anxiety, as Wexner merely personifying his anxiety,” his decision to use the word “dybbuk” was “significant.”

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

​Les wexner, Wexner, Billionaire, Pedophile, Elites, Jeffrey epstein, Epstein, Victoria’s secret, Demon, Malicious spirit, Demonic, Possession, Congress, House oversight committee, Rothschild, Politics