Category: blaze media

UFC President Dana White defended his company, masculinity, and free speech in an interview on “60 Minutes.”

CBS’ Jon Wertheim asked White about everything from his relationship with President Donald Trump to the company’s financial history, but it was the fight promoter’s defense of his audience that served as a popular clip that circulated online.

‘How can somebody be too masculine? Is that a possibility?’

The host referred to White describing the ongoing “wussification of America,” which White quickly corrected.

“I think I said ‘p***ification,’ but yeah,” White clarified.

This transitioned into Wertheim citing an apparent “cultural movement” dominated by males.

“It’s a lot of guys. I mean, they call it ‘the manosphere,’ you’re one of the leaders,” he told White.

The UFC president retorted, saying that his audience was definitely male-dominated and masculine, too: “Eighteen- to 34-year-old males and growing,” White stated. “We’re global. We are definitely, unapologetically masculine.”

Wertheim, though, questioned White with the liberal trope that successful male environments and activities are in danger of becoming too masculine. “Can this bubble over to too much? When you hear toxic masculinity?” Wertheim asked.

“Haha, what’s that mean?” White asked back.

The host had no answer. “You tell me,” Wertheim replied.

Flabbergasted, White continued, “You just said it! What’s the definition of toxic? How can somebody be too masculine? Is that a possibility? Can you be too masculine? … No.”

“The answer is hell no,” White said.

RELATED: Trump’s surprise specialist for UFC-White House event is not who you’d expect

White’s positions on many topics — and the 13-minute segment as a whole — were seemingly presented as an anomaly; an obscure, niche subset of sports that “60 Minutes” viewers may be blissfully unaware of. Among these topics was White’s view of free speech, which he unapologetically defended.

In response to being asked if there were any scenario where a fighter’s speech would get them into trouble with the company, White replied, “I’m a big believer in free speech, and unfortunately, probably the most important speech to protect is hate speech.”

“I hate it,” White said about cancel culture. “I don’t like trying to destroy people’s lives over doing something dumb.”

RELATED: One company may just have killed pay-per-view forever

(L-R) Canelo Alvarez, Dana White, and Terence Crawford on stage during Fanatics Fest NYC 2025 at Javits Center on June 22, 2025, in New York City. (Photo by Slaven Vlasic/Getty Images)

In July, the UFC agreed to host an event at the White House in 2026, which was just one of the connecting points in Wertheim’s presentation of White’s relationship with President Trump.

The two talked about the early days of the UFC and its struggles when Trump was the only person who was willing to host an event at his venue, the Trump Taj Mahal in Atlantic City, New Jersey.

“It was so bad at one point,” White said about the company’s finances. He said UFC owners Frank Fertitta III and Lorenzo Fertitta had even called him to say they could not keep the company going under the circumstances. However, White revealed he got a call the very next day that said, “F**k it, let’s keep going.”

Regarding his conversations with Trump, White said they are fairly simple.

“We don’t talk politics … we talk about goofy guy stuff that all guys talk about,” White explained. “We talk about ‘Rocky’ movies, we talk about fights that have happened.”

While much of the segment presented White and the sport as alien, some 20 years after its success boomed, CBS will soon have to come to terms with its popularity. In July, parent company Paramount acquired the rights to UFC broadcasts for $7.7 billion over seven years, per CNBC.

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

​Fearless, Dana white, Masculunity, Woke, Feminism, Ufc, Mma, Cbs, Paramount, Sports 

The Trump administration has been facing increased pressure to fix the fraud and abuse of work visas in the midst of a multifaceted battle against the immigration problem. To that end, the Department of Labor’s new Project Firewall promises to maximize measures for holding companies accountable if they are in violation of the law.

According to a press release detailing the plan for Project Firewall, the DOL and its relevant partners will increase accountability measures for H-1B-sponsor employers.

‘By rooting out fraud and abuse, the Department of Labor and our federal partners will ensure that highly skilled jobs go to Americans first.’

Companies found to be in violation of the H-1B program rules may face “collection of back wages owed to affected workers, the assessment of civil money penalties, and/or debarment from future use of the H-1B program for a prescribed period of time,” per the press release.

One notable characteristic of the plan, launched on September 19, is U.S. Secretary of Labor Lori Chavez-DeRemer will “personally certify the initiation of investigations for the first time in the department’s history.”

RELATED: American jobs first: Hefty new H-1B visa fee will likely curb legal immigration, especially from India

Photo by Bill Pugliano/Getty Images

“The Trump administration is standing by our commitment to end practices that leave Americans in the dust. As we re-establish economic dominance, we must protect our most valuable resource: the American worker. Launching Project Firewall will help us ensure no employers are abusing H-1B visas at the expense of our workforce,” said Chavez-DeRemer in a press release.

“By rooting out fraud and abuse, the Department of Labor and our federal partners will ensure that highly skilled jobs go to Americans first,” she continued.

On X, the Department of Labor’s account noted that Project Firewall “protects Americans and ensures they are prioritized in the hiring process.”

The plan also involves a greater level of coordination among governmental agencies, including the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

While these increased measures of accountability will be met with some enthusiasm, others have expressed concerns about the Trump administration’s handling of H-1B fraud, especially after the administration’s partial walk-back of the $100,000 application fee it announced recently.

Data shows that each year the government receives hundreds of thousands of H-1B visa applications, almost all of which are certified. These jobs often break the six-figure salary threshold, which some people point out is not fair to American workers, many of whom are struggling to find a job in today’s market.

The plan will presumably resume after the government returns from the shutdown caused by Democrats.

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

​Politics, H-1b visas, H-1b, Project firewall, Dol, Department of labor, Secretary of labor, Lori chavez-deremer, Trump administration 

Last Monday night, the liberal New York elite gathered at the storied Gramercy Theater for a benefit billed coyly as a “A Night of Music and Peace.”

Presumably on hand to represent the peace was Avraham “Miko” Peled, the Israeli-American founder and president of Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit Dar Alhurriya (Palestine House of Freedom). As for the music, that was left to guitar legend Eric Clapton, 80 years old but still with impressive enough chops to justify the invitation-only event’s average ticket price of $2,500.

‘I’m walking the halls of Congress with people who have no regard for human life!’ said Omar, seemingly oblivious to the irony.

Inside, the crowd of around 150 — mostly older white folks, many accessorized with solidarity-signaling keffiyehs — were invited to purchase Clapton concert tees and signed copies of Peled’s autobiography, “The General’s Son,” as staff herded them toward the clump of folding chairs that constituted the floor seating.

White Room

As Peled took the stage, the audience erupted in chants of “Miko! Miko! Miko!” — a response that was at once curiously rehearsed-sounding and off-puttingly frenzied, like a gaggle of preschoolers greeting the appearance of Elmo on “Sesame Street.”

After a few thank-yous, Peled wasted no time before introducing the night’s star attraction. Clapton, who much earlier in his career urged his countrymen to “keep Britain white” by expelling the “w*gs” and “c**ns” turning it into a “black colony,” now aimed his guitar — a Fender Stratocaster painted to look like Palestine’s flag — at colonizers of a lighter hue.

Looking uncannily like an aged Andy Dick, the octogenarian guitarist expertly belted out early Cream classics like “White Room,” “Sunshine of Your Love,” and a rendition of “Hoochie Coochie Man” that had second-generation pundit Max Blumenthal singing along and pumping his fist in the air, gyrating next to a man sporting a Hawaiian shirt and fedora bearing the slogan “End Wars!”

Blues hammered

Blumenthal wasn’t the only politico celeb accounted for. His Grayzone colleague Aaron Maté had also made it out to celebrate the global intifada, along with his father, superstar addiction expert Gabor.

In the middle of “Tears in Heaven,” a semi-famous comedian and former mayoral candidate — now four IPAs in — turned to your correspondent to mention what a close friendship he enjoyed with Roger Waters, who he claimed was also in attendance.

“Blues, blues, blues, blues!” he later yelled out after Clapton and Co. had wrapped up what was indeed an exemplary specimen of the genre (their fourth in a row), before turning to the bartender to screech about how unfair it was that rich people paid less in taxes.

Tepid Waters

Much to this writer’s surprise, his name-dropping proved credible a little bit later when none other than the Pink Floyd co-founder himself materialized on stage, dressed in his usual all-black ensemble of cigarette skinny jeans and potbelly-constraining T-shirt.

To thunderous applause, Waters essayed some pre-song banter about “this horrible thing called Zionism,” only to resort, seconds later, to the activist’s version of lip-syncing. Apparently not prepared to speak from the heart, Roger produced his iPhone and played a video of himself speaking at a recent college protest. “I’m so proud of all the young people in all the universities,” said the tiny onscreen Waters. “Zionism is over, and criticism of Israel and its genocidal policies has never been anti-Semitic.”

Putting his phone away, the IRL Waters then treated the audience to a rendition of his little-known 2024 single, “Under the Rubble.”

RELATED: The genocide that isn’t: How Hamas turned lies into global outrage

Photo by Jacek Boczarski/Anadolu via Getty Images

Ilhan communication

As the band left the stage, the crowd clamored for more, chanting “Free, free Palestine.”

Instead of an encore performance of “Wish You Were Here,” it was rewarded with something almost as invigorating: the spectacle of Ilhan Omar — draped in her usual liberating headscarf — strutting onstage to accept a miniature wrestling championship belt from event organizers.

“I’m walking the halls of Congress with people who have no regard for human life!” said Omar, seemingly oblivious to the irony of making such an accusation given the left’s ongoing celebration of Charlie Kirk’s assassination. She lifted the belt and walked off stage; the audience cheered.

The evening was over. Eric Clapton waved, sporting a smile that said “please don’t cancel me again.” Intoxicated by overpriced well drinks and the spirit of revolution, the departing crowd raised defiant fists to the night sky, only tucking them away discreetly when it was time to saunter across the street and into the trendy boutique hotel for the afterparty.

​Palestine, Israel, Gaza, Ilhan omar, Leftist, Eric clapton, Roger waters, Scene report 

The abrupt assassination of a young husband and father — who joyfully invited strangers from all walks of life to debate him in public forums — was a barbaric assault on all Americans and our shared foundational values, free speech, and religious liberty.

I was deeply disturbed by the deranged sickness of morally bankrupt Americans rejoicing at Charlie Kirk’s reprehensible murder. I’ve unceasingly prayed and wept for his family and friends as though they were my own.

It’s time to get the Bible back into schools to revitalize the true meaning of liberty and respect for your neighbor.

Yet as a mom and a Christian, I know I must not despair. The Bible likens despair to a refusal of hope, justice, and goodness.

At Kirk’s historic memorial, President Donald Trump mentioned a renewed urgency to including the holy Bible in public life. Erika Kirk modeled positive, convicted fortitude through motherhood — with grit, grace, and gospel — that I have never before witnessed in a publicly broadcasted forum. “Be an Erika Kirk in a Kardashian world” commentaries flood my social media feeds.

But an exasperating and lingering question remains: “How did America get here?” Guns? Social media? Absent parenting? Ignorant education? A desensitizing news cycle?

A root cause is expelling God from public schools.

Foundation shattered

Charlie Kirk was wrongly labeled as a “hateful extremist” because millions of students have been brainwashed, for decades, to dissociate America’s foundation from God.

Young people have been conditioned to be offended by truth and context and now automatically treat neighbors like garbage and claim that “words are violence” when they disagree.

Historically, educators partnered with parents to reinforce our shared American values as they were rooted in the Bible. Through the 1800s, schools and colleges often included the Bible as a textbook. Our founding fathers stressed the importance of morals and religious knowledge for a functioning republic.

In a 1798 statement, John Adams himself wrote, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

But here’s where we are now:

Most fifth-graders don’t learn that the 13 colonies required a declaration of faith to hold a public office.Very few eighth-graders are taught that our Declaration of Independence mentions God four times — a majority of the 56 signers were Bible-believing Christians.A majority of high-school students have zero knowledge that our Liberty Bell, as well as countless government landmarks, including our Capitol, Lincoln Memorial, Washington Monument, and more, are inscribed with biblical verses.Non-denominational prayer, Bible stories, the Ten Commandments, and the mere words “one nation under God” are disputed, degraded, and often prohibited from public gatherings at elementary schools through universities.Schools used to teach biblical principles like the Golden Rule to promote good character and conduct, but now secular-driven “restorative discipline” dictates that right, wrong, good, evil, truth, and lies are relative.

Moral education begins at home, but what happens if that falls short?

Chaos reigns

Without reinforcement in schools, we evidently get a generation of morally ignorant citizens unable to function in a republic. Kirk himself once explained that the way our government was set up is no longer compatible with our current, faith-rejecting citizenry and public institutions. I agree.

Absent parents and the exclusion of 3,000-year-old wisdom from our school systems bear the blame.

Now, students are actively taught that God is not and never was part of our nation’s founding, that there is no safety alongside someone who thinks differently from you, and that words are violence. Smartphone worship, disrespect for parents and teachers without consequence, and the abandonment of rules and order have infected our nation.

Notwithstanding our rightful religious differences as Americans, it’s time to get the Bible back into schools — as a historical work that helped establish our nation and laws — to revitalize the true meaning of liberty and respect for your neighbor.

Teaching students to understand our U.S. Constitution gets much easier if students are knowledgeable about the biblical ideals that shaped it. The Bible also provides practical order, like the Golden Rule, that chaotic classrooms can certainly benefit from today.

Myth exposed

But what about Thomas Jefferson’s “separation of church and state”? It’s a stretched fabrication that I’m ashamed to admit I once believed.

Five years ago, I supported keeping biblical mentions out of public schools and forums. As a baptized, lifelong Christian — active in church as a child and now a Sunday School teacher as an adult — even I was brainwashed and miseducated.

RELATED: Why Trump’s religious liberty agenda terrifies the left — but tells the truth

plherrera/Getty Images

In 1947, the Supreme Court case of Everson v. Board of Education ruled that neither a state nor the federal government could “pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another.” For the first time in American history, the First Amendment was now not only about the prohibition of establishing a national religion; it was also about not giving any encouragement to any religion. The modern “strict separation” view was born.

The five justices drafted their decision not based on the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution, but on a brief letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802, citing his personal conviction that religious belief should include “building a wall of separation between Church & State.”

In 1962, the Supreme Court further ruled in Engel v. Vitale that a generic school prayer violated the Court’s new definition of the First Amendment. “Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country.”

The prayer was not specific to Christianity or any religion and was reminiscent of the language of the Declaration of Independence. Yet it was still deemed unconstitutional.

Since then, the “separation of church and state” language has been used to remove God and appreciation for our foundational morality from public life and, most tragically, from our schools.

Do we have happier or better-educated student citizens because of this?

Dismal test scores, school shootings, record numbers of mentally ill teens, campus violence, increasingly anti-American curriculum, and depraved TikToks celebrating the public execution of an innocent man exercising peaceful free speech in a public forum prove otherwise.

Bring God back

Is it possible that those Supreme Court decisions were misguided and wrong for our society?

This sickness is destroying each of us — and our country — in real time. This is why we do what we do at PragerU Kids.

Parents and teachers, now is the time to bravely support and include:

the Bible in academic historical discussions.non-denominational prayer at school events.the Ten Commandments as they relate to America’s founding values for freedom.saying God’s name at your child’s school … no matter who may be irrationally triggered.

Don’t let anyone trick you into thinking these things are hateful. The life, liberty, and happiness of our republic literally depend on it.

I’m grateful for the White House’s nationwide “America Prays” initiative, as well as state leaders in Oklahoma, Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, and more who are taking action to get Bibles and/or the Ten Commandments included in public school classrooms again.

I’m not suggesting a mandated belief in the theology of the Bible, but rather a general and practical K-12 education and inclusion of how the Bible’s rules, order, and tenets were foundational to our nation.

Just as kids should learn that slavery is abhorrent (as the Bible teaches), it’s imperative that young Americans learn how our founders’ vision of limited government, through faith-based values of blind justice and truthful morality, only works when citizens have a mutually respected moral compass. Countless historical writings, works, and landmarks prove that America’s hard-fought liberty is contingent on ethical citizens.

Get God — and the goodness, hope, virtue, and equality taught in the Bible — back into our schools and communities now, because what we’ve been doing for the last 75 years isn’t working. And time’s running out.

​Charlie kirk, Christianity, Liberty, American founding, Christian, God, Classroom, Faith 

The teenager suspected of brutally beating an elderly worker at a rap concert in Kansas City over a week ago finally has been charged.

The Juvenile Office of the 16th Judicial Circuit in Jackson County on Tuesday filed one felony assault charge and one misdemeanor assault charge against the teen suspect, WDAF-TV reported.

‘Kind of sad things got to this point.’

A viral cellphone video shows a young male knocking down an elderly worker at a Sept. 21 NBA YoungBoy concert at the T-Mobile Center and then delivering well over a dozen blows to the worker’s face and head.

Police confirmed to Blaze News that the suspect is under the age of 16.

WDAF in a previous story said the suspect also assaulted a security guard who ejected him from the venue.

A T-Mobile Center spokesperson told Blaze News that the staff members “sustained serious injuries. After receiving prompt care from on-site first aid personnel, they were later treated at a local hospital for their injuries.”

RELATED: Viral video: High schooler physically attacks teacher in front of other students — then cop gives kid brutal wake-up call

Officer Alayna Gonzalez of the Kansas City Police Department told Blaze News that the “juvenile male was detained and subsequently released to his guardian pending further investigation.” However, police later told Blaze News that detectives on Friday submitted a case file to juvenile court “for consideration of applicable charges” against the teen suspect.

The victim of the attack caught on video — 66-year-old Thomas Schlange — is seen on the clip trying to push away the teenager who towers over him, but Schlange has no chance. The teen begins delivering a flurry of lefts and rights as Schlange is flat on his back and trapped on the floor between two rows of seats.

Schlange told WDAF in a follow-up story, “I went down and had blows to my head,” and that his priority in those moments was “just getting him off, getting him off of me … because he was so enraged, so we were just, in essence, trying to protect the fans.”

So what allegedly set off the suspect?

Witness and local pastor Robert McDaniel told the station the attack commenced after the suspect was told his ticket didn’t match the seat he was in.

“He was asked to move to another place because his ticket wasn’t where he was sitting, and immediately he just completely lost it,” McDaniel recounted to WDAF.

In the viral video of the attack, a man is pulling the teen off Schlange, who appears dazed, and blood is visible around his mouth.

That man who intervened — the only person who stepped up and stopped the brutal beating — is Antonio Clayter.

He described to WDAF in another story what he saw in that moment, noting that Schlange was “just doing his job” when “the kid … just spazzed out, and he pushed him.” When the teen suspect began pummeling Schlange, Clayter appeared in the camera frame and pulled the attacker off.

“I had to,” Clayter recalled to WDAF. “It wasn’t even a feeling; it was something that had to be done. Like, I have family members that are that age. This isn’t right. … I was raised with morals and values. You can’t act like that, especially to our elders.”

RELATED: Male, 19, accused of hitting girlfriend’s baby in head so hard that little girl had to go on ventilator. Now she’s dead.

Clayter also offered a warning to the teen, the station said: “You can’t grow up with that type of mentality, because you’re not gonna get far in life at all. … I’ve been in trouble, and I know what road that you can go down. … You’re not gonna get anywhere good besides prison or dead that way, bro.”

After the charges against the teen were announced Tuesday, Schlange told WDAF that “accountability is important. But [it’s] actually kind of sad things got to this point. Restraint, cooperation, and respect are important lessons to learn.”

The station said hearings in the case are closed to the public, and Missouri law requires the names of juveniles in the juvenile justice system to be confidential.

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

​Charged, Teenager, Teen attacks elderly male, Kansas city, Viral video, Kansas city police department, Felony assault charge, Juvenile office of the 16th judicial circuit in jackson county, T-mobile center, Crime 

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has announced that the U.K. will force all workers to have a digital ID, which he claimed is a tool to help crack down on out-of-control immigration. But Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck is well aware that’s not the real purpose of the digital ID — and that Americans need to watch out for this kind of government response to similar issues.

“This government will make a new, free-of-charge digital ID mandatory for the right to work by the end of this parliament. Let me spell that out. You will not be able to work in the United Kingdom if you do not have digital ID,” Starmer said, addressing U.K. citizens.

“It’s as simple as that. Because decent, pragmatic, fair-minded people, they want us to tackle the issues that they see around them. And, of course, the truth is we won’t solve our problems if we don’t also take on the root causes,” he continued.

“Looking upstream to tackle poverty, conflict, climate change, issues that aren’t just intolerable for those of us who care about inequality and injustice where it’s found in the world, but which have clear consequences for our own citizens,” he added.

Glenn sees right through Starmer’s attempt to explain the dystopian system away.

“They have a problem in England with people coming across the water and just invading the country. And then they’re taking all the jobs from, you know, decent Brits. And they haven’t stopped them, you know, they’re welcoming them in. They’re not turning them away. They’re not sending them back home or anything,” he says.

Instead of turning immigrants away or sending them back to solve the problem of illegal immigration, they’re implementing the digital ID.

“This is the way progressivism works. They create the idea and then they cause the problem so that they can go back and say, ‘We need to do this to solve this problem.’ OK? So they’ve caused the problem of illegal immigration. They’ve caused the problem of all of these things happening on their streets. But don’t worry, they’ve already designed the answer and it’s a digital ID,” Glenn says.

And what’s more worrisome, Glenn explains, is that the digital ID will “have complete control and oversight of your entire life.”

“They want digital ID to control the population. That’s what all of this is about. Control your every movement, your every thought, your every word. Control it, regulate it, and make sure that you’re kept in line,” 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.

​Camera phone, Video phone, Video, Sharing, Upload, Free, Youtube.com, The glenn beck program, Glenn beck, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Digital id, Digital id uk, Digital sovereignty, Keith starmer, Immigration, Immigration crisis, Population control 

Don Lemon and Joy Reid appear to be in a competition for who can sound the least intelligent in front of an audience, and BlazeTV host Jason Whitlock isn’t sure who is winning.

“Men who look like you, men who vote like you, and men who sound like you. White men, something is broken. Something is cracked deep inside when so many of you believe the answer to fear, to loss, to change is violence,” Lemon said on “The Don Lemon Show.”

“Are you listening to me? I hope I’m saying it loud enough for the people in the back,” he added.

“Don Lemon has always been difficult for me to understand. This feels almost intentionally stupid so that he can be mocked and ridiculed by people that disagree with him. So that he can spark a conversation,” Whitlock says on “Jason Whitlock Harmony.”

“Have you looked at the statistics on the violence among black men? Did you look at the violence that happened as a result of George Floyd and Jacob Blake and Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown and Eric Garner and so on and so forth? Are you kidding? Are you kidding me?” he adds.

But Lemon, of course, isn’t alone in his ridiculous statement, as former MSNBC host Joy Reid had to throw some nonsense out into the universe as well.

“If you go back before the 20th century, there were no income taxes. There were no regulations on business. You could earn as much money as you want, leave 100% of it to your children with no taxes. That’s the world they want back. And to get it back, they need society to change. They need people to be less modern. They need people to want fewer things,” Reid said on BET while attempting to equate the Trump administration to fascism.

“When I heard that I was like, ‘Is she talking about heaven?’ No taxes. I get to earn as much as I want. I get to leave it to my family. Man, that sounds awesome. When we say ‘Make America Great Again,’ if that’s what they’re talking about, man, sign me up,” Whitlock says.

When deciding who made the “dumber statement,” Whitlock’s panel is having a hard time — but Wilfred Reilly believes it was Reid.

“It’s a tough competition, but I’d probably have to say Joy Reid. You know, Don Lemon, I mean, I think everyone on the panel knows this, but you know, crime is high across the board in the USA, but if you look at murder, black murder rate — seven times the white murder rate,” Reilly says.

“That’s an absurd, racist thing to say,” he says. “But Joy Reid … she doesn’t know what fascism is. I mean, fascism is, you know, it’s the system, business, and government working together.”

“She went through, ‘You’re not going to pay taxes, the government’s not going to be involved in every aspect of life. You can leave 100% of your money to your son or your little girl,’” he continues.

“I would be very comfortable … going back to that world,” he adds.

Want more from Jason Whitlock?

To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Camera phone, Free, Sharing, Upload, Video, Video phone, Youtube.com, Jason whitlock harmony, Jason whitlock, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Joy reid, Don lemon, Fascism, White men, Anti-white, Racism against white people, The don lemon show, Wilfred reilly 

The FBI called U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund just after 3 p.m. on Jan. 6 to offer help from its SWAT teams, but the number of agents the FBI sent to the Capitol was just 55, Sund told Blaze News.

The FBI’s Washington Field Office was receiving calls from frantic members of Congress holed up in their Capitol offices after crowds breached the building at 2:12 p.m. Assistant FBI Director Steven D’Antuono, head of the Washington Field Office, called Sund just after 3 p.m. and offered help, the former Capitol Police chief said.

‘They’re not trained for it — the plainclothes guys.’

Sund said he does not understand FBI Director Kash Patel’s assertion that 274 special agents were deployed to the Capitol primarily to do “crowd control.”

He said FBI special agents wearing body armor would not be properly outfitted for crowd control.

“They’re not equipped for crowd control. They’re not trained for it — the plainclothes guys,” Sund said. “I don’t even know what training their tactical guys have, but at least they’d be a little bit better equipped with possibly tactical helmets and gas masks.”

Sund said while compiling figures from his call for mutual aid, he tallied the count from the FBI at 55 special agents.

“That evening we were calculating what resources had come in,” he said. “And the number I’ve been given all along was 55 from FBI.

“So the 17 or more law enforcement agencies that ended up coming in — I think it added up to 1,764 officers — included 55 from the Washington Field Office of the FBI. I had to get that number from somewhere. The 55 is a lot different than 274.”

Sund said he coordinated the effort with FBI Deputy Director David Bowdich.

“So I said, ‘Yeah, I’ll take whatever help you can send,’” Sund recalled. “He said, ‘We’re going to send over our WFO SWAT team, but he is going to send them directly to where the members of Congress [are].’ And I said, ‘No, let’s not do that. Let’s have you come to Lot 16, and that way I can put you with a Capitol Police officer.’”

A leaked report from the House Select Subcommittee to Investigate the Remaining Questions Surrounding January 6 said 274 FBI special agents deployed to the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.

Some of those agents responded to the scenes of pipe bombs found at the Republican National Committee and Democratic National Committee, the report said. Director Kash Patel said the 274 agents were sent mostly to do “crowd control” after a riot was declared at 2:20 p.m.

Just before the call from D’Antuono, Sund called the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments to request law enforcement mutual aid. The National Capital Region Mutual Aid Agreement was activated, followed by a Regional Incident Communication and Coordination System message that alerted agencies over a multistate area, Sund said.

RELATED: FBI Jan. 6 report sets off a firestorm: Why did it take 56 months to disclose 274 agents at Capitol?

FBI SWAT teams patrol the U.S. Capitol and adjacent office buildings before a joint session of Congress reconvened on Jan. 6, 2021.Photo by Olivier Douliery/AFP via Getty Images

Nearly 1,800 officers responded to the Capitol as a result. The New Jersey State Police reached the U.S. Capitol before the D.C. National Guard. The Guard was delayed by three hours, 19 minutes due to resistance and interference at the Pentagon, a House investigation found.

By 3:06 p.m., tactical teams from the FBI, ATF, U.S. Marshals, U.S. Park Police, U.S. Secret Service, Capitol Police, and other agencies were sweeping the Capitol to find and eject any remaining protesters. That effort started on the top level of the Capitol and moved down, according to security video.

‘The number I’ve been given all along was 55 from FBI.’

The major SWAT response was prompted in part by the 2:44 p.m. shooting of Ashli Babbitt in the hallway outside the Speaker’s Lobby.

After he shot Babbitt, Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd made a false radio report, claiming he was taking fire and was prepared to fire back. Byrd never corrected his statement over the radio. He was never fired upon, and the only shot fired in the Capitol on Jan. 6 was the one he fired, killing Babbitt.

Capitol Police security video shows that an FBI tactical team pulled up in the House Plaza parking lot in an armored vehicle at 2:32 p.m. The SWAT team entered the Capitol’s South Doors at 2:53 p.m., just minutes after an ATF tactical team.

The FBI declined a request for comment from Blaze News.

Sund said at about 6:05 p.m., while walking to brief U.S. senators with Senate Sergeant at Arms Michael Stenger, he noticed 20-25 members of what he believed to be the FBI Hostage Rescue Team.

“It could have been their SWAT team, but it sure looked like they were highly equipped, and it looked like their hostage rescue team,” he said.

RELATED: Senate sergeant at arms who oversaw January 6 found dead

Tactical teams from the FBI and U.S. Secret Service stage in a hallway at the Hart Senate Office Building at 7:02 p.m. on Jan. 6, 2021.U.S. Capitol Police CCTV

The HRT is not part of the Washington Field Office. Based in Quantico, Va., the HRT is the FBI’s only full-time tactical team, ready at all times for high-risk missions including counterterrorism.

Capitol Police security video shows FBI special agents wearing body armor securing the hallways of House and Senate office buildings as members of Congress prepared to resume their session on the 2020 election results after 8 p.m. on Jan. 6.

Sund was forced to resign by former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) right after Jan. 6. While Pelosi and others sought to place blame for Jan. 6 on Sund, his testimony before various investigative bodies over more than four years has established that it was Pelosi, generals at the Pentagon, and former Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy who created the disastrous delay in deploying the National Guard.

“[Gen.] William Walker had testified if he had been given an authorization right away when I first reached out to him, he thinks he could have had people there before they breached the Capitol, which would’ve been huge,” Sund said.

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

​Politics 

Over the past year, Elon Musk’s public comments and X activity have subtly shifted to include more frequent references to Christianity, such as sharing biblical wisdom and promoting forgiveness, while stopping short of declaring himself a true believer.

‘I think this notion of forgiveness is important; I think it’s essential.’

Turning Point USA CEO Erika Kirk wrote in a post on X over the weekend, “Go to church,” and Musk shared her comment. That same day, Musk slammed the Anti-Defamation League, calling it “a hate group” because it “hates Christians.”

Musk has repeatedly stated that he believes “woke” is the “religion that occupies the space previously held by Christianity.”

Last month, Musk quoted a Bible verse, Matthew 7:3, writing, “Why do you see the speck in your neighbor’s eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye?”

He also shared from the Lord’s Prayer, “Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.”

RELATED: Elon Musk claims to have canceled Netflix subscription over Charlie Kirk mockery and transgender indoctrination

Photo by PATRICK T. FALLON/AFP via Getty Images

During an interview with Jordan Peterson last year, Musk described himself as a “cultural Christian,” explaining that while he admires “the principles that Jesus advocated,” he is “not a particularly religious person.”

RELATED: Elon Musk pledges $1 million to honor the memory of Iryna Zarutska — and bring down the media blackout

Elon Musk. Photo by Samuel Corum/Getty Images

“I do believe that the teachings of Jesus are good and wise and that there’s tremendous wisdom in turning the other cheek,” Musk told Peterson. “And with respect to bullies at school, I think you shouldn’t turn the other cheek; you should punch them on the nose and then, thereafter, make peace with them.”

“I think this notion of forgiveness is important; I think it’s essential,” 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!

​News, Elon musk, Christianity, Christian, Erika kirk, Anti-defamation league, Adl, Politics 

The Anti-Defamation League is ending its list of what it considers to be extremist groups and people.

The ADL made an announcement on Tuesday evening about retiring its “Glossary of Extremism,” a list of over 1,000 entries, which it claimed “served as a source of high-level information on a wide range of topics for years.”

‘Christian Identity is a religious ideology popular in extreme right-wing circles.’

The organization admitted that an “increasing number” of its entries were outdated, while stating that many of the entries had somehow been “intentionally misrepresented and misused.”

The organization wrote on X that it will now “explore new strategies and creative approaches” to present its research and focus on “fighting antisemitism and hate.”

For the past few days, the ADL has been under intense scrutiny after readers noted its page on Turning Point USA, Charlie Kirk’s organization, was listed as a hate group.

In fact, TPUSA’s backgrounder on the ADL website remains labeled with the tags “Extremism, Hate, or Terrorism” and comes from the ADL’s “Center on Extremism.”

The page relates TPUSA to extremists or extremism at least six times and claims the organization’s events have featured “far-right conspiracy theorists,” with Kirk creating a “vast platform” used by “numerous extremists.”

The ADL’s description of Kirk and his company drew widespread backlash, even from Tesla founder Elon Musk.

RELATED: Charlie Kirk assassination inspires famed ESPN commentator to run for Senate — as a conservative

— (@)

Musk sent out an array of posts on X in recent days, calling the ADL a “hate group” as well as a “far left hate propaganda machine.”

Musk also wrote that the ADL “sells hate” and “hates Christians, therefore it is is a hate group.”

The “Christians” post was in response to the ADL’s page on the “Christian Identity movement,” which is also listed under “Extremism, Hate, or Terrorism” by the ADL.

“Christian Identity is a religious ideology popular in extreme right-wing circles,” the ADL writes. “Adherents believe that whites of European descent can be traced back to the ‘Lost Tribes of Israel.’ Many consider Jews to be the Satanic offspring of Eve and the Serpent, while non-whites are ‘mud peoples’ created before Adam and Eve.”

It adds — still in the introduction — that the movement holds “virulent racist and anti-Semitic beliefs” that are usually accompanied by “extreme anti-government sentiments.”

RELATED: Elon Musk claims to have canceled Netflix subscription over Charlie Kirk mockery and transgender indoctrination

Musk had said that “the ADL needs to change this now” in response to a screenshot from the group’s page about TPUSA, which was last updated in 2023; but the page has since seen changes.

Much of the verbiage seems to have simply been reworded, but the page no longer lists TPUSA as a right-wing organization in its very first point. Some of the points have also been toned down. For example, the page allegedly used to say TPUSA “has promoted numerous conspiracy theories,” but now says it “has promoted some conspiracy theories.”

As reported by Fox News, the now-defunct glossary had listed groups like the Nation of Islam, the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers, and more as extremists. It also included TPUSA and the “America First” movement, but not Antifa or Black Lives Matter.

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

​News, Tpusa, Charlie kirk, Turning point, Adl, Anti-defamation league, Anti-semitism, Anti-christian, Christianity, Poltiics 

While congressional Democrats continue to dig their heels in, the federal government has officially shut down for the first time in over half a decade.

The government shut down at midnight on October 1 after Democrats continuously blocked the Republican-led funding bill in the Senate. The GOP’s funding bill is a clean, 91-page continuing resolution with no partisan anomalies. The only new provision in the Republican bill is a bipartisan provision that boosts security funding for politicians in the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s horrific assassination.

‘The ball is in the Democrats’ court.’

Rather than passing the clean bipartisan resolution, Democrats have insisted on ramming through their $1.5 trillion funding bill that reverses every meaningful legislative accomplishment Congress passed earlier in the year with President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Some of these Democratic priorities include continuing $350 billion worth of Biden-era subsidies, reviving federal funds for PBS and NPR, and reinstating public health care benefits for illegal aliens.

“House Republicans passed the SAME clean, nonpartisan CR that Chuck Schumer himself voted for back in March — and called ‘the right thing to do,'” Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) wrote in a post on X. “The ONLY thing that’s changed since then is pressure from his base to close down the government. That’s not leadership, it’s cowardice.”

RELATED: White House dares Democrats with nuclear response to looming shutdown

Annabelle Gordon/Bloomberg via Getty Images

“The ball is in the Democrats’ court,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said in a post on X. “But Chuck Schumer wants a Schumer shutdown.”

The House previously passed the GOP’s continuing resolution in a 217-212 vote, with just one Democrat, Rep. Jared Golden of Maine, joining Republicans to keep the government open. Republican Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Victoria Spartz of Indiana voted against the bill.

The Senate eventually took up both the Republicans’ clean CR and the Democrats’ hyper-partisan funding bill on Tuesday, both of which failed. Although Republicans enjoy a supermajority in Congress, the CR needs 60 votes to pass the Senate. Assuming all 53 Republicans vote for the bill, at least seven Democrats will have to cave to reopen the government.

Notably, Democratic Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada and John Fetterman of Pennsylvania as well as independent Sen. Angus King of Maine voted in favor of the Republican funding bill. One GOP senator, Rand Paul of Kentucky, voted against it. Both bills will be up for a vote again in the Senate on Wednesday.

RELATED: Most Democrats vote against bill boosting security funds for politicians following Kirk assassination

Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Although shutdowns have historically proven to be unpopular, Republicans are seizing the opportunity to continue implementing the MAGA mandate.

Ahead of the shutdown, Russell Vought’s Office of Management and Budget began circulating a memo directing different agencies to identify programs whose funding would lapse following the shutdown and to begin drafting reduction in force notices for employees who would be affected.

As of this writing, Vought announced that roughly $18 billion in New York City infrastructure projects have been halted to “ensure funding is not flowing based on unconstitutional DEI principles.”

“It is unclear how long Democrats will maintain their untenable posture, making the duration of the shutdown difficult to predict,” Vought wrote in a memo released Tuesday. “Regardless, employees should report to work for their next regularly scheduled tour of duty to undertake orderly shutdown activities. We will issue another memorandum indicating that government functions should resume once the president has signed a bill providing for appropriations.”

RELATED: Exclusive: GOP slams Democrat spending plan as ‘stale leftovers’ riddled with radical left-wing policies

Photo by Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images

To Vought’s point, it remains unclear how long Democrats will allow the government to stay closed. The last shutdown began on December 22, 2018, during Trump’s first term, after Congress failed to approve a spending package that included funding for Trump’s border wall. The shutdown lasted 35 days, the longest in history.

The government eventually reopened on January 25, 2019, after Congress reached a deal to pass a temporary spending bill without border funding, and Trump signed it.

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

​John thune, Mike johnson, Donald trump, Russ vought, Jd vance, Russell vought, Hakeem jeffries, Chuck schumer, House democrats, House republicans, Senate democrats, Senate republicans, Congress, Government shutdown, Schumer shutdown, Jared golden, Thomas massie, Victoria spartz, John fetterman, Catherine cortez masto, Angus king, Omb, Trump administration, White house, Federal firings, Mass layoffs, Doge, One big beautiful bill, Politics 

For decades, artificial intelligence was something students only encountered in science fiction books. They read stories about robots, ultramodern computers, and machines that could think for themselves. But in just the past few years, the AI revolution has leapt off the page and into real life, quickly reshaping virtually every aspect of our society, including our education system.

The AI revolution is happening so quickly that we must work fast to wrap our heads around the reality and implications of it in education before it’s too late. For parents, especially those concerned about what’s happening in our schools, AI represents both an opportunity and a potentially serious threat. Like social media before it, this technology is advancing faster than most of us can keep up with, and the decisions we make today will determine how it influences our kids for the rest of their lives.

AI doesn’t have to be a threat to our children. But if parents don’t get involved now, this powerful technology will shape our kids without our vital input.

If you are a parent, you cannot afford to ignore what AI is doing in education. Here are five things every parent must understand:

AI is already in your child’s classroom

The AI revolution isn’t some looming event; it’s already here. Schools throughout the country are already adopting “smart” learning platforms, tutoring apps, and grading and curriculum systems powered by AI.

Some school districts are experimenting with AI software that generates lesson plans, constructs writing assignments, and even helps teachers communicate with students. One platform called MagicSchool bills itself as “the go-to AI assistant for educators worldwide, designed to simplify teaching tasks, save time, and combat teacher burnout.” MagicSchool has existing relationships with numerous public school systems, including Atlanta, Denver, New York City, Seattle, and many others.

This means decisions about how your child learns, what material they see, and even how their performance is evaluated are increasingly influenced by Big Tech algorithms. The question is: Who controls those algorithms, and what values are embedded into them? Parents deserve answers before handing their children’s education to algorithms.

AI is a great tool and could be a great indoctrinator

AI can certainly be a valuable tool for educators and students. It can open the door to new levels of personalized learning that provide help to struggling students.

Used well, it can identify where a child is falling behind and provide extra practice, tailor lessons to a student’s strengths and weaknesses, and even spark new excitement for subjects that once felt out of reach. In an educational environment where one-on-one interaction is lacking, AI could offer desperately needed specialization.

AI can also carry significant hidden biases. The people who design AI systems decide what information is “correct,” what is “misinformation,” what viewpoints are acceptable, what viewpoints are “harmful,” and how to present material. For example, several studies show that the leading AI models have left-leaning political slants. These entrenched biases, coupled with the personalization capabilities of AI, could be a very powerful tool for indoctrination.

If you think debates over curriculum were intense before, imagine an invisible algorithm quietly steering how your child learns history, civics, or even basic facts about the world. AI could become the most effective indoctrination device ever placed in a classroom.

AI comes with major privacy and safety risks

AI feeds on data. And when it comes to schools, that is your child’s data. Everything from test scores and study habits to behavioral patterns and even emotional responses can be collected, stored, and used to refine Big Tech algorithms.

Where does that data go? Who has access to it? Can it be sold, tracked, or used years later when your child applies for a job or college? Parents must demand transparency and strict limitations. Protecting the privacy of all children in the age of AI is essential.

Lawsuits are already popping up on this issue. For instance, Google is currently facing a lawsuit over allegations that it collected data on millions of students through its educational tools, raising serious privacy concerns about how much information tech companies gather on kids without parental consent.

AI can damage mental health

Education is about far more than memorizing facts. It includes mentorship, human connection, and building social and emotional skills that prepare kids for life. If AI tutors, chatbots, or grading systems replace too much of a teacher’s role, children risk becoming isolated and less resilient.

Parents need to insist that AI supplements teachers, not replaces them. A screen is no substitute for a caring adult who knows your child, believes in them, and holds them accountable.

Another risk comes from what researchers call “AI sycophancy.” This is when chatbots or AI tutors simply tell students what they want to hear, reinforcing their opinions instead of challenging them. Over time, that can stunt critical thinking and give kids a distorted sense of reality. This is especially troubling in an educational setting.

Parents must be the first line of defense

The lessons of social media are clear: Parents cannot rely on bureaucrats, politicians, or tech companies to put kids’ best interests first.

The same is true with AI. Parents have the right and responsibility to ask tough questions. What AI tools are used in your child’s school? What data is being collected? What guardrails are in place? And most importantly: Who is in control?

RELATED: Virtual schooling a viable alternative? Thank woke teachers, school closures, and AI

Photo by JackF via Getty Images

Parents should also demand policies that protect children’s privacy, dignity, and freedom of thought. Our kids’ future is too important to leave in the hands of unaccountable algorithms.

AI doesn’t have to be a threat to our children. But if parents don’t get involved now, this powerful technology will shape our kids without our vital input. Parents must lead the way in demanding transparency, accountability, and human-centered education.

Our children deserve schools that prepare them for the future without compromising their privacy, freedom, or humanity. That’s only possible if parents step up now, before it’s too late.

​Opinion & analysis, Opinion, Ai, A.i., Artificial intelligence, Ai in schools, Schools with ai, A.i. learning, Ai learning, Education, Privacy, Bias, Indoctrination, Freedom, Liberty, Smart learning, Technology, Big tech, Mental health, Isolation, Parents, Parental consent 

Operation Midway Blitz, the immigration enforcement surge underway in Chicago since the beginning of September, continued with a large show of force targeting gang members. Tensions are running high among different leaders as Trump continues to execute on his deportation mandate.

On Tuesday, federal agents descended on a building in Chicago in a raid targeting illegal aliens, some with suspected ties to Tren de Aragua. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents surrounded a building, with some agents rappelling down from Black Hawk helicopters.

‘If you come to our country illegally and break our laws, we will hunt you down, arrest you, deport you, and you will never return.’

Nearly 300 federal agents from FBI, Border Patrol, ICE, and the ATF assisted in the operation in Chicago’s South Shore neighborhood. Newsweek reported that roughly 30 illegal aliens were detained, some with suspected Tren de Aragua affiliation.

President Trump designated Tren de Aragua as a foreign terrorist organization at the beginning of his second term.

RELATED: ‘Shoot the f**kers!’ Anti-ICE agitators caught on video apparently calling for violence in wake of deadly Dallas shooting

Border Patrol Chief Gregory Bovino has spearheaded deportation raids in Illinois. (Photo by Jacek Boczarski/Anadolu via Getty Images)

On Tuesday morning, Trump called out the largest of the infamous sanctuary cities, describing the deportation operations as a “war from within”: “What they’ve done to San Francisco, Chicago, New York, and Los Angeles, they’re very unsafe places. And we’re going to straighten them out one by one.”

Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker (D) fired back at Trump’s message on X. “To Donald Trump: Stop using military troops and ICE to invade and disrupt American cities. Stop calling your political opponents ‘enemies’ of the U.S. Stop attacking the 1st Amendment. Our troops and our nation deserve better than you acting as a petty tyrant.”

Operation Midway Blitz was announced on September 8, 2025, in honor of Katie Abraham, a young woman killed by an illegal alien in Illinois.

“For years, Governor Pritzker and his fellow sanctuary politicians released Tren de Aragua gang members, rapists, kidnappers, and drug traffickers on Chicago’s streets — putting American lives at risk and making Chicago a magnet for criminals,” said Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin at the beginning of Operation Midway Blitz. “President Trump and Secretary Noem have a clear message: No city is a safe haven for criminal illegal aliens. If you come to our country illegally and break our laws, we will hunt you down, arrest you, deport you, and you will never return.”

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

​Politics, Donald trump, Jb pritzker, Gregory bovino, Operation midway blitz, Tren de aragua, South shore, Chicago, Illinois, Katie abraham, Ice, Fbi, Border patrol 

A Chicago panhandler pushed an 82-year-old woman face-first to the ground last month, breaking her knee, after she refused to give him money, CWB Chicago reported, citing officials.

Prosecutors said 49-year-old Dion Rance was panhandling near the drive-through of a McDonald’s in the 1000 block of West Wilson Avenue around 10 a.m. Sept. 15 when the victim — who visits the restaurant for breakfast almost every day — exited the fast-food restaurant, the outlet reported.

‘People in Uptown are racist and don’t give any money.’

Prosecutors added that surveillance video allegedly shows Rance following the victim along a sidewalk before shoving her in the back, CWB Chicago said, adding that the woman fell face-first upon the concrete and screamed in pain as Rance walked away.

More from CWB Chicago:

A passerby rushed to help the woman, who returned to her nearby apartment building, where a staffer called 911. She was taken to Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center with a fractured knee and additional injuries to her face and body from the fall, prosecutors said.

Police who reviewed the surveillance video immediately recognized Rance and placed his image into a photo lineup. But the victim, who suffers from cataracts, could not identify him, according to a detention filing.

Officers recently found Rance walking in the 5300 block of North Clark in Andersonville and took him into custody.

Prosecutors said Rance admitted to asking the woman for money but claimed he pushed her because she called him the N-word — in Chinese, the outlet noted.

Rance told officers he went to school with “a Chinese guy who taught him a lot,” CWB Chicago said, citing the detention filing.

However, a court document states that the victim speaks Japanese, the outlet noted.

RELATED: Chicago thug accused of randomly punching mother of 11 in face, knocking her out on downtown street — and White House reacts

Armando L. Sanchez/Chicago Tribune

Rance also allegedly told investigators that “people in Uptown are racist and don’t give any money,” CWB Chicago added.

Judge James Murphy III ordered Rance detained on charges of aggravated battery of a victim over 60 and aggravated battery in a public place, the outlet noted.

Jail records indicate Rance was booked Sept. 18 on no bond, and he remained behind bars Wednesday morning. His next court date is scheduled for Oct. 10, jail records say.

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

​Assault, Elderly woman attacked, Panhandler, Arrest, Racism accusation, N-word, Chinese language, Crime 

It’s not hard for BlazeTV host Mark Levin to dismantle Jimmy Kimmel’s narrative about Charlie Kirk’s assassination — because it was false — nor is it hard for him to dismantle the free speech outrage that followed his warranted suspension.

Levin points out that while Kimmel claimed the “MAGA gang” was “desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it,” all he really did was use ABC’s platform to lie.

“Well, first of all, that is a flat-out lie, and it is an attempt to politicize and exploit what took place, and people who love Charlie and his supporters trying to upset them, and he succeeded,” BlazeTV host Mark Levin says on “LevinTV.”

“Now, is that free speech? Is that constitutionally protected free speech under the First Amendment of the Constitution? There’s a difference between constitutionally protected free speech and just free speech,” he continues.

“The Kimmel suspension was never a battle over free speech or government control of speech. Kimmel was dropped because he’s a loathsome punk who made a highly inappropriate comment about the political assassination of Charlie Kirk. It is Charlie Kirk who was murdered because of his speech. Did Kimmel even talk about that? No. He lied,” he adds.

Levin also points out that ABC is a private company and has every right to fire its employees for what they say.

“I would ask you,” Levin says, addressing the audience, “most of you are employees, right? So if you say something that’s outrageous or inappropriate or something of that kind, and you’re fired, do you jump up and down and say, ‘Hey, my free speech rights! Hey, my free speech rights!’”

“You are careful to some extent because you know if you don’t have a governor on your mouth, you will be fired. Whether it’s your free speech or not, it’s irrelevant. Employers can and do fire employees for things they say,” he continues.

“The chairman of the FCC had no role in any of it, no matter what he said or didn’t say. He can’t even act on his own. He needs a majority of the commissioners,” he says, adding, “But he didn’t actually do anything. So there’s no First Amendment at issue, despite the best efforts to concoct one.”

Want more from Mark Levin?

To enjoy more of “the Great One” — Mark Levin as you’ve never seen him before — subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Sharing, Free, Camera phone, Video phone, Upload, Video, Youtube.com, Levintv, Mark levin, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Jimmy kimmel, Charlie kirk assassination, Charlie kirk, Maga, President trump, Free speech, First amendment, Abc 

So many slide decks and white papers promise a future of AI under human control, a project framed not as a technological sprint but as a long journey. The language is meant to reassure, a steady hand on the shoulder of a jittery public. Yet the very premise of the journey implies a certain departure, a recognition that the systems we are building now operate at a speed and complexity that have outstripped our capacity to easily oversee. One might nervously wonder whether the center will hold.

One answer to this predicament is “interpretability,” a technique for examining an AI model to figure out why it did what it did. It’s the equivalent of reading a plane’s flight recorder after a crash. But a system making thousands of autonomous decisions a second offers no time for such leisurely forensics. A failure may not be an event but a condition, a constant state of potential deviation.

The new thinking, then, is to move from forensics to architecture. The goal is to build in the oversight, to treat governance, not as a secondary analysis, but as a foundational requirement, an immutable audit trail that logs not just a model’s output but its entire lineage: the data it was fed, the model version that made the call, the key inputs that shaped its rationale. We are no longer merely watching the machine; we are building a watchtower.

In the loop?

At the heart of this new architecture is the “human-in-the-loop,” a concept whose neatness belies anxiety. The human, we are told, will shift from a passive reviewer to an active designer, engage in a continuous loop of governance that sets the boundaries and defines the goals. But the very act of depending on these systems can engender a state of cognitive offloading, a subtle atrophy of our own critical faculties. We are asked to be the system’s ultimate arbiter at the very moment the system is eroding the instincts required for the job.

The friction is everywhere. We see it in the laboratory, when a researcher at the University of Washington uses deep learning to design functional proteins that have never existed in nature, opening doors to novel medicines and biosensors. We see it in the game of Go, when a machine makes a move that defies centuries of human wisdom, a move of startling, alien creativity. The promise is one of discovery, of accelerating the scientific method. The possible reality is a “theory glut,” a condition in which the bottleneck shifts from ideation to validation. We find ourselves in a world that can generate hypotheses at a superhuman rate, but our capacity to test them, to ground them in the physical world, remains stubbornly, irreducibly human. We might drown in brilliant answers to questions we have not yet learned how to ask.

This dissonance echoes in the most intimate spaces of our lives. We are offered “digital twins,” virtual replicas of our own physiology, updated in real time, upon which a surgeon can rehearse a procedure in a risk-free environment. We are told that AI copilots will save the legal profession a great number of hours per year, freeing lawyers from the drudgery of document review to focus on the higher arts of deepening client relationships.

RELATED: Female avatar appointed as Europe’s first AI government official

Photo by SFOTO / Contributor via Getty Images

Free and fragile

The narrative is one of liberation, of efficiency begetting connection. And yet, this reclaimed time exists within a system of escalating expectations. The Jevons paradox, a 19th-century economic observation, finds its modern footing here: As efficiency increases, so sometimes does demand. The two hours a sales professional saves each day are not banked for leisure; they are reinvested into the pursuit of higher quotas. The freedom from menial tasks does not lead to rest, but to the creation of new, more complex work.

And beneath it all, there is a persistent hum of vulnerability. The very transparency we engineer for control becomes a new attack surface. An adversary can engage in “data poisoning,” slipping malicious information into a training set to warp a model’s output in subtle, insidious ways. The system built for audibility becomes uniquely susceptible to a kind of attack that leaves no obvious trace, a hidden vulnerability that could lie dormant for years in a system that guides autonomous vehicles or calibrates antibiotic dosages. The solution, it turns out, has problems of its own.

The long journey points not toward a destination but toward a state of perpetual negotiation. The most critical constraint is not hardware or networking or power. It is talent. The crisis is human. The skill gap between the demand for those who can manage these systems and the available supply is the true bottleneck. The government may frame this challenge as a matter of national security, an imperative to maintain a competitive advantage. But it seems to be something more fundamental. A controllable AI future is not about building smarter machines. It is about the far more complex and uncertain project of building a more resilient and healthy human society, one capable of managing the strange and brilliant weather of its own creation.

​Tech, Ai, Jevons paradox, Artificial intelligence 

Conservatives have long noticed a disturbing pattern: Hispanic illegal aliens appear again and again in drunk-driving cases. Recent news searches bring up multiple examples, some involving the deaths of children.

This summer’s tragedy in Wisconsin made the problem impossible to ignore — yet the corporate left-wing press tried to do just that. Two high school sweethearts, Hallie Helgeson and Brady Heiling, died when a drunk driver going the wrong way slammed into their car. Just weeks earlier they had gone to prom together.

Americans deserve more than platitudes and silence. They deserve honesty about the cultural, biological, and policy factors behind drunk driving.

The driver was Noelia Saray Martinez-Avila, a Honduran illegal alien who had racked up multiple drunk-driving charges. She lived in a sanctuary jurisdiction that shielded her from deportation. Only under the Trump administration’s renewed immigration enforcement did local authorities finally hand her over to ICE.

A cultural problem that fuels tragedy

The Wisconsin case was heartbreaking, but it was not unique. In 2007, the Raleigh News & Observer published a rare report on the problem. A Mexican man admitted he thought he “drove better after a few beers” and that drunk driving was normal in Mexico. At the time, alcohol-related crashes caused by Hispanic drivers in North Carolina were three times higher than for non-Hispanics.

The national data confirms the trend. Hispanic drunk-driving rates are roughly double those of whites. Alcohol-use disorder is three times as common. More than a third of Hispanic alcohol-dependent users relapse, compared with 23% of whites.

Binge-drinking drives much of the danger. Hispanics are more likely than whites to consume large amounts of alcohol in one sitting. Forty-two percent of Hispanic drinkers admit to three or more drinks per day, compared to 30% of whites.

The numbers don’t lie

Mexicans, who make up half of the illegal alien population, show the highest risk. Mexican-Americans are three times more likely than whites to develop alcohol-use disorder. FBI crime data reported last year shows that Hispanics, 19% of the U.S. population, account for 30% of drunk-driving arrests and 44% of public drunkenness arrests.

In California, where Hispanics made up 37% of the population at the time, they represented 44% of DUI charges in 2012 (the latest I could find). In North Carolina, Hispanics were just 8% of the population but accounted for 18% of 75,000 DUI arrests in 2007.

New Mexico illustrates the deadly stakes. With a population that is half Hispanic, the state suffers nearly three times the national alcohol-related death rate. Five people die every day from alcohol. Before reforms in the 2000s, New Mexico’s DUI crash rate stood 70% higher than the national average.

The pattern reflects Mexico itself. In the United States, drunk drivers cause 31% of traffic deaths. In Mexico, the figure is over 70%. About 24,000 Mexicans die annually in alcohol-linked crashes — more than twice the U.S. toll despite the population difference. Until recently, most Mexican states had no legal blood-alcohol limits, and licensing often required little more than paying a fee.

Native populations face even steeper risks. In McKinley County, New Mexico, where the population is 80% Native American, the alcohol-related death rate is three times higher than the state average and ten times the national average.

Research points to genetic factors. Enzymes that mediate alcohol’s effects vary by ethnic group. Indigenous populations, exposed to alcohol only in the last 300 years, show far higher vulnerability. With Mexicans being heavily Mestizo — roughly 20% indigenous and 60% mixed indigenous (Mestizo) — the biological risk compounds the cultural one.

The media silence

Given decades of national campaigns against drunk driving, one might expect attention to this ethnic dimension. Instead, the media downplay or ignore it. An America First lobbying group once tried to enlist Mothers Against Drunk Driving to raise awareness, but the effort went nowhere.

RELATED: ‘Imminent hazard’: Trump administration shuts licensing loophole after illegal alien trucker allegedly causes fatal crash

c_sorvillo via iStock/Getty Images

Academics sometimes excuse the problem by claiming Hispanic immigrants drink out of depression or isolation. Yet the biggest consumers are Puerto Ricans, not Mexicans. Cuban-Americans drink the least. Mexican women report the lowest rates of all, meaning the averages are driven almost entirely by men.

And claims of “racial profiling” ring hollow. Most offenders are caught at night, their identities confirmed by arrest records, not stereotypes.

Why it matters

Democrats dismiss these realities for the same reason they ignore illegal aliens’ broader lawbreaking: victimhood politics. They portray Hispanics as downtrodden and conservatives as cruel.

But the grief of families like the Helgesons and Heilings is not a talking point. It is permanent loss. It is trauma that echoes for generations.

Americans deserve more than platitudes and silence. They deserve honesty about the cultural, biological, and policy factors behind drunk driving. They deserve leaders who will enforce immigration law, reject sanctuary loopholes, and tell the truth about the risks that put their families in danger.

​Opinion & analysis, Illegal immigration crime, Illegal aliens, Drunk driving, Drunk driving deaths, Mexico, Alcoholism, California, New mexico, Native americans, Hispanics, Immigration and customs enforcement, Ice, Sanctuary cities, Dui arrests, Media bias, Hallie helgeson, Brady heiling, Noelia saray martinez-avila, Genetics 

Hollywood talent agencies are about to sign their first AI (non-human) actor-entity.

The AI entity seducing the film industry goes by the name of Tilly Norwood. Tilly is the creation of Eline Van der Velden, herself a human actress/comedian. Van der Velden seems to be more than happy to play the role of bridge between the film executive looking to save money and the technologist looking to provide cost-saving solutions in the form of digital representations on-screen. Van der Velden has sought for some years now to facilitate the corporate-technological gap within the film industry. Mission accomplished.

In the music industry, where life has never been the same since Napster, the ravages of tech are well known, and the response to AI reflects it. Spotify is rejiggering its algorithm to allow for select, curated AI music applications to flow on its platforms. Spotify has signaled that its policy revisions will target AI impersonation, spamming of the algorithm by AI slop producers, and, most notably, steps toward an international standards agreement regarding disclosure of AI content.

This role — creating fake people to act out what used to be a soulful calling for humans — we could call ‘non-human avatar technician.’

Spotify moving to increase its protections and analysis with respect to AI music is a great step. Maybe we’re winning. Somewhere in the corporate cloud are human ears listening to human voices crying for authenticity. Spotify’s latest forays into adjusting the relationships between these digital entities and humanity will provide an initial template for other corporations to build on. Wise human feedback must be incorporated as the process of adjustment proceeds.

Before we start slapping each other on the back, a nagging question: Why did the premier AI corporations roll out the creative stuff first? Why not remake HR, or paralegals? Maybe it’s too conspiratorial, but one wonders if it’s an example of “little Suzie, do you want peas or carrots?” Which is to say, if we avoid the AI ultra-slop in the arts, can we, human beings who live here on planet Earth among other humans, mitigate the creep toward the managerial, juridical, and religious AI slop flood? We better.

Conspiracy theorists of old used to talk about divide and conquer with reference to the unfolding forces (or secret agents) of history, and it’s hard to avoid seeing the way that the left is divided from the right with respect specifically to art and technology. In this latest reassessment, Spotify removed 75 million fraudulent songs. Not bad. This substantiates, to some degree, the company’s genuflection toward the sanctity of the art and the artist. Still, the company’s history and the pressures of making “number go up” suggest that audiences and critics should remain vigilant.

RELATED: A penguin avatar will be the new leader of a Japanese political party

Photo by Bloomberg / Contributor via Getty Images

Neko Case, the powerhouse PNW singer/songwriter (one given to voicing the occasional lefty political opinion), recently lamented of her latest album: “I had the privilege of making this record in a studio and maybe got the last advance anybody’s ever gonna get. And so I wanted to make sure all the sounds on the record were made by real people.”

We can imagine, and the discourse will soon provide, some lukewarm verbiage-gruel smeared over the only mildly interesting notion of AI fronting for an artist. “Puppeteer” simply wouldn’t do to substantiate the recursive pretension required to float a profession that (if it takes off) is just corporate and tech logic merging to feed the maw of public appetite for jejune psychic diversion. This role — creating fake people to act out what used to be a soulful calling for humans — we could call “non-human avatar technician” and stem the otherwise inevitable flow of false accolades.

There are many who say of this moment that AI and the intensity of investment ($500 billion from the U.S. government, as one example) suggest merely another financial bubble that, much like previous bubbles, is preceded by a massive fear of missing out. There’s some of that FOMO involved in this latest swing from Hollywood executives and music industry decision-makers. There’s a sense that they don’t know what’s next. Which isn’t surprising, because all such executives have ever known is how to buy true creative talent. Is AI true creative talent? Nope.

Hollywood needs to do what it can to limp along. Artists such as Case, despite whatever ideological or political differences they may have with Christians (and there are plenty), will need to look toward firmer spiritual ground if they hope to avoid total obliteration. For now, the audiences prefer human hands on instruments and genuine human vision in their storytelling. If the battle comes down to corporate costs vs. customer preference, however, we may need to begin looking at other options soon.

​Tech, Culture 

No political insult gets thrown around more recklessly these days than “fascist.” The word has been gutted of meaning, reduced to a club progressives swing at President Trump and people like Stephen Miller and the late Charlie Kirk. Democrats and their media allies casually smear conservatives as extremists who follow the “fascist playbook.”

Joe Biden himself dragged the rhetoric to a new low. In September 2022, standing in front of Liberty Hall in Philadelphia, he declared that “MAGA Republicans” are extremists and enemies of democracy.

“They embrace anger,” Biden thundered. “They thrive on chaos. They live not in the light of truth, but in the shadow of lies.” Weeks earlier, at a fundraiser in Maryland, he even called the MAGA movement “semi-fascist.”

The smear reveals less about conservatives and more about the authoritarian streak buried in the left’s own philosophy.

Say what you want about Trump’s sharp elbows in politics, but he never demonized American voters as enemies of the republic. Biden did — and Democrats have repeated the smear ever since. The question is: What happens to a country when its leaders brand millions of citizens “fascists”?

The goals of the MAGA movement are plain: Protect natural rights, foster prosperity, expand energy access, secure the border, reduce crime, preserve domestic peace, and pursue a foreign policy rooted in prudence. These aims hardly resemble fascism. Yet defenders of liberty now find themselves caricatured as authoritarians.

To see how absurd this charge is, it helps to remember what fascism actually means.

A (very) short history of fascism

The intellectual father of fascism was Giovanni Gentile, an Italian philosopher born in 1875. Following Hegel, he saw the rational state as the end point of history. He defined “true democracy” not as liberty but as the individual’s willing subordination to the state.

For Gentile, public and private interests were one and the same. To serve society was to serve the state. His student, Benito Mussolini, turned this philosophy into doctrine: “All is in the state, and nothing human exists or has value outside the state.”

Contrary to today’s rhetoric, fascism did not begin on the right. Mussolini himself was a Marxist. He and Antonio Gramsci broke with Leninist revolution but retained socialism’s collectivist core. Fascism emphasized nationalism, racial particularity, and the total authority of the state — summed up in the term “blood and soil.” Its very name came from the Latin word fasces, the Roman bundle of rods bound to an axe — symbolizing unity and power.

Fascism arose in the economic chaos of the 1920s and ’30s. Italy and Germany launched massive public-works programs, funded by confiscatory taxes, borrowing, and printing money. As with communism, fascism treated every citizen as an employee and tenant of the party-run state. Force and coercion were essential. Mussolini was blunt: The individual’s “anti-social right” to resist the state did not exist.

In his 1928 autobiography, he wrote:

The citizen in the Fascist State is no longer a selfish individual who has the anti-social right of rebelling against any law of the Collectivity. The Fascist State with its corporative conception puts men and their possibilities into productive work and interprets for them the duties they have to fulfill.

Fascism and the New Deal

The American version of the 1930s response to the Great Depression, of course, was Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal. Today it’s remembered as democracy’s answer to authoritarianism. But at the time, many noted striking similarities between Roosevelt’s programs and those of Mussolini and Hitler.

John T. Flynn, a leading conservative writer, warned in “As We Go Marching” (1944) that the New Deal looked like a “good fascism” — regulation and planning at home, military adventures abroad, and growing state power. Others saw the same trend: massive public-works projects, charismatic leadership, centralized propaganda, and the creation of a “voluntary compulsion” that blurred the line between civic duty and government coercion.

Wolfgang Schivelbusch’s remarkable 2006 book, “Three New Deals,” compares the era’s regimes. He did not equate Roosevelt with Mussolini or Hitler, but he highlighted the parallels: grand projects like the TVA, monumental architecture, direct appeals from the “leader” to the people, and the constant use of war imagery. Roosevelt even warned that those who resisted his programs were “enemies” of recovery.

The difference, of course, was that America retained constitutional checks that Europe discarded. Yet the centralizing impulse — and the temptation to vest extraordinary authority in a leader — was real.

Progressive roots

The resemblance should not surprise us. European fascism and the New Deal both grew from the same philosophical soil. The American founding drew on John Locke and natural law. “The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one,” Locke wrote. “And reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind.” The Declaration of Independence, in turn, proclaimed that rights are endowed by the Creator and cannot be erased by government.

European thought took another path, from Machiavelli to Hegel, exalting the state as the source of order and authority. By the late 19th century, American Progressives imported this vision. Woodrow Wilson and other intellectuals trained in German universities rejected the founders’ natural-rights philosophy and embraced statism.

RELATED: The next generation of Marxists is marching through the institutions

Photo by Luiz C. Ribeiro for NY Daily News via Getty Images

Progressives, like their European cousins, placed the state at the center of political life. They taught that rights flow not from God but from government — positive, material entitlements dispensed by bureaucrats. Over the past century, Democrats from Wilson and FDR to Lyndon Johnson and Barack Obama have built a regime that subordinates every aspect of American life to the federal leviathan.

The real irony

Given this history, 21st-century progressives should think twice before flinging “fascism” as a slur. Their own intellectual lineage shares far more with Mussolini and Gentile than anything found in the MAGA movement.

Trump supporters want liberty secured, prosperity restored, and sovereignty defended. Progressives want the state elevated above all. The smear reveals less about conservatives and more about the authoritarian streak buried in the left’s own philosophy.

​Fascism, Fascist, Opinion, Opinion & analysis, Maga, Donald trump, Hegel, Joe biden 

A Los Angeles man allegedly murdered his wife and dismembered her body because she had a difficult time losing weight after giving birth to his child.

Jonathan Renteria, 25, confessed in a handwritten letter to killing his 37-year-old wife, June Renteria, according to a criminal complaint.

‘My wife, June Renteria, is deceased in her apartment. I kill her. I am truly sorry.’

On Sept. 11, the man was found “inside a hotel room in Ventura County lying in a bathtub bleeding from a puncture wound to his forearm” at about 12:30 p.m., according to prosecutors.

A note was found in the room reading, “My wife, June Renteria, is deceased in her apartment. I kill her. I am truly sorry,” with an address in Hollywood written on the back.

Police were sent to the apartment address on a welfare check and reported a “foul” odor emanating from the door.

Once they gained entry into the residence, they discovered his wife “in a state of decomposition with her arms and legs severed.”

Security video obtained by police showed the man leaving the apartment with the couple’s 1-year-old child about five days before he was found bleeding in Ventura.

Jonathan Renteria was treated at a hospital and then interviewed by police. He allegedly confessed to the crime and told investigators that he had gotten into an argument with his wife “about her failure to lose weight following her pregnancy.”

He said his wife threatened to leave him and ensure he never saw his daughter again. He reacted by getting her into a “rear-naked chokehold,” which he learned in jiujitsu. That admission corroborated a medical examiner’s finding that she had died from “traumatic neck injuries.”

RELATED: Illegal alien dismembered man who overdosed and flushed his organs in order to avoid deportation, police say

Prosecutors also claimed that he had sent an email to his father confessing to the crimes.

“The only thing I could do in the moment was choke her. And I did. I held it for as long as I could until my arms gave out. I was horrified at myself. Right after this I took a lot of drugs to get through it,” he allegedly wrote.

Jonathan Renteria was arrested and charged with murder and the mutilation of human remains. His bail was set at $4,000,000.

The suspect met the victim on social media, and she moved to the United States from Scotland to be with him.

A GoFundMe page set up for the family of June Bunyan, the maiden name for June Renteria, said that she had been proud of earning a law degree and had moved to the U.S. in pursuit of becoming a defense attorney.

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

​Dismembered wife, June renteria, Murder over birth weight, Jonathan renteria murder, Crime