Category: blaze media

Comedic actor and director Ben Stiller objected to the White House using a scene from one of his most popular movies in a video promoting the attacks on Iran.

The high-energy, 42-second video is titled “Justice The American Way” and blends patriotic movie clips with scenes from the joint U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran.

‘We never gave you permission and have no interest in being a part of your propaganda machine.’

One of the scenes is a brief clip from “Tropic Thunder” showing Tom Cruise’s Harvey Weinstein-like character, Les Grossman, dancing.

Stiller, who wrote, directed, and starred in the 2008 comedy movie, posted the video and his demand on the X social media platform.

“Hey White House, please remove the Tropic Thunder clip,” he wrote. “We never gave you permission and have no interest in being a part of your propaganda machine. War is not a movie.”

On the other hand, fellow actor Kevin Sorbo expressed his approval for the video from the White House.

“I love this,” he responded.

Stiller has previously expressed his support for liberal causes and politicians, including in 2024 when he appeared in a fundraiser video for then-Democratic candidate for president Kamala Harris.

RELATED: Ben Stiller denies receiving USAID money for humanitarian trip to Ukraine: ‘These are lies from Russian media’

Photo by Dominik Bindl/Getty Images

Despite his liberal proclivities, Stiller did speak out against those who called certain scenes in “Tropic Thunder” racist in the years since its release.

“I make no apologies for ‘Tropic Thunder.’ Don’t know who told you that,” he said in 2023 about the movie’s blackface character, played by Robert Downey Jr. “It’s always been a controversial movie since when we opened. Proud of it and the work everyone did on it.”

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

​Ben stiller, White house iran video, Tropic thunder movie, Hollywood vs trump, Politics 

As Operations Epic Fury and Roaring Lion under President Donald Trump close in on the first full week attacking Iran, the House has passed a resolution reaffirming Iran’s pariah status against the United States. However, over 50 Democrats have refused to go along.

In a Thursday vote on a resolution reaffirming that “Iran continues to be the largest state sponsor of terrorism,” 53 Democrats voted against the resolution, while Republicans voted unanimously in favor of it.

‘It’s disappointing — but not shocking — that 53 of my Democrat colleagues could not vote in support of a resolution calling out Iran’s terrorism.’

Sponsored by Rep. Brian Mast (R-Fla.), the nonbinding resolution passed 372-53, with two Democrats voting present and five members not voting, including the embattled Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas).

Of course, all members of the “Squad” of progressive Democrats were among the ranks of those who voted against the resolution: Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), and Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.).

RELATED: House passes the buck on Mace’s push for sexual misconduct disclosure amid Tony Gonzales scandal

Rep. Lateefah Simon (D-Calif.)Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

The two-page resolution stated several reasons Iran is inimical to the United States, including sponsoring enemies who have killed U.S. soldiers in the Middle East.

The reasons included, for example, that “the Islamic Republic of Iran remains the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism and provides substantial financial and military support to groups including Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis.”

The resolution also made note of the Iranian nuclear enrichment program: “Whereas, according to the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Rafeal Grossi, Iran has amassed a large stockpile of enriched uranium and continues to block access to undeclared sites in Iran affiliated with their ‘big, ambitious nuclear weapons program.'”

Rep. Lateefah Simon (D-Calif.) claimed the resolution “contains inaccuracies and is designed to justify the President’s actions in Iran.”

On the other hand, North Dakota Rep. Julie Fedorchak, a Republican, said in a statement: “Standing with our allies and confronting state-sponsored terrorism is essential to protecting Americans and advancing stability around the world. This resolution sends a strong message that we will not ignore or excuse the regime’s extremist actions.”

“It’s disappointing — but not shocking — that 53 of my Democrat colleagues could not vote in support of a resolution calling out Iran’s terrorism,” Fedorchak subsequently wrote on X.

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

​Politics, Lateefah simon, Ilhan omar, Rashida tlaib, Ayanna pressley, Alexandria ocasio-cortez, Brian mast, Operation epic fury, Operation roaring lion, Iran, Israel, Democrats, Terrorism, Radical democrats 

A Republican congressman trying to unravel the unbelievable spending under the Biden administration was rightfully angered by one example exposed during congressional testimony with a State Dept. official on Thursday.

Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy Sarah Rogers tried to explain one program that paid for making maps more “queer,” as she testified in front of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

‘Nonbinary and trans francophone linguistic attitudes and ideologies towards inclusive French in Montreal, Canada.’

“Can you tell me, what is ‘queering the map’?” asked Republican Rep. Brian Mast of Florida.

“So, I think we were trying to make the maps more gay,” Rogers replied.

“Literally? How do you make a map more gay?” he responded. “Or gay at all?”

“Since the age of cartography, we’ve had pretty good maps, but maybe they weren’t gay enough,” she said.

“So, I know also, I took critical theory in college,” Rogers added. “I think sometimes people use ‘queer’ as a verb. I do understand that the maps that we were trying to make gay were, I think, of Czechia and Slovakia. So maybe those countries asked for it? I doubt it, but I don’t know.”

“We do have real things to work on in Congress,” the congressman claimed, “like what’s going on with the imminent threat of Iran, and it is embarrassing that we have to talk about the fact that things like this were funded: nonbinary and trans francophone linguistic attitudes and ideologies towards inclusive French in Montreal, Canada.”

Video of the exchange from Chairman Mast’s official account was widely circulated on social media.

“My time is expired. I’m gonna give you a list of these, and any of these you can provide me the receipt for: the Facebook link to where they wanted to take photos of how they were doing a DEIA flash mob in Kyrgyzstan,” Mast continued.

“Whatever documentation they have of all these things,” he concluded, “we would love to see that and would absolutely love to know the individuals specifically that were busy writing these grants because they have no business receiving another paycheck from the people of the United States of America.”

RELATED: Pete Buttigieg shoveled out $80 billion in DEI from Transportation Dept while ignoring air traffic control upgrades: Report

Republican Rep. Bill Huizenga of Michigan detailed some of the crazier spending under Biden during his speech at the hearing.

“The Biden State Department spent $25,000 on transgender opera in Colombia, $150,000 to ‘build the capacity of intersex leaders’ in India, $20,000 for a drag show in Ecuador, $72,000 for queering the map of Slovakia, whatever that means, and the list goes on.”

Rogers responded to the video from her social media account.

“Czechia and Slovakia are great countries. I’m sorry that my predecessors ‘queered’ your maps! This is why future public diplomacy grants will be streamlined, accountable — and channeled toward real American interests, like free speech and sports diplomacy,” she wrote.

A Newsweek fact-check found the claim that the Biden administration spent taxpayer money on a drag show in Ecuador to be true.

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

​Dei federal spending, Under sec. sarah b rogers, Rep. brian mast of florida, Making the maps gay, Politics 

New York state senators are looking to gatekeep information from more than a dozen professions.

In an alleged attempt to block AI chatbots from providing harmful advice to users, New York Democrats have proposed a bill targeting any program that is “impersonating certain licensed professionals.”

‘A chatbot user would also be allowed to bring civil action against the chatbot provider.’

The bill would prohibit a chatbot from giving “substantive responses,” information, or advice that when taken by a “natural person” would constitute illegal advice or practice. Specifically, it would relate to occupations that require licensing.

The legislation specifically referred to professions listed under official New York state articles and includes the following: medicine, dentistry, veterinary medicine, physical therapy, pharmacy, nursing, podiatry, optometry, engineering, architecture, psychology, social work, and mental health services (including various counselors, therapists, and “psychoanalysts”).

If passed into law, a chatbot user would also be allowed to bring civil action against the chatbot provider to recover damages, attorneys’ fees, and any money spent as a result of following the AI’s advice.

RELATED: Shock report reveals Gen Zers and Millennials dislike AI ads more than ever — as executives double down

Photo by Neil Constantine/NurPhoto via Getty Images

First proposed in April 2025, the bill (S7263) is sponsored by state Senator Kristen Gonzalez (D) of the 59th district, with co-sponsors state Senators Michelle Hinchey (D), John C. Liu (D), and Julia Salazar (D).

According to outlet City & State New York, Hinchey appears to be the only one of the senators who did not endorse Democratic New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani during his campaign.

The bill recently passed through the Internet and Technology Committee of New York with a 6-0 vote and will now go to the state Senate floor.

RELATED: Sam Altman says NSA can’t use OpenAI — then tells staff they don’t have a say in military actions

Photo by Udo Salters Photography/Getty Images

An interesting and perhaps overlooked part of the bill — aside from the fact that it mirrors a 2024 “South Park” episode — includes the declaration that chatbot providers must provide “clear, conspicuous, and explicit notice to users” that they are interacting with AI.

The notice would have to appear in easily legible language, in the same format the chatbot is using. This would likely avoid confusion for consumers who are wondering if a business’ support platform is utilizing prewritten answers, providing human customer support, or simply using an AI chatbot assistance program.

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, Chatbot, New york state, Mamdani, Mayor mamdani, Democrats, Tech 

A young D.B. Sweeney circled a juicy role in the 1989 miniseries “Lonesome Dove,” based on the best-seller by Larry McMurtry.

Sweeney later demurred, opting for a somewhat smaller part. Why? Playing “Dish” Boggett meant sharing scenes with Robert Duvall. And that, he figured, would be priceless.

‘There’s so much desperation. People want to be famous so bad, that energy leads to some dark pathways.’

Good call.

Lessons from a master

“He was my hero,” Sweeney tells Align of the legendary actor, who passed away at 95 last month. “I learned more from film acting from him than anybody else.”

Sweeney marveled at Duvall’s meticulous approach to his craft, like hiring a real-life tracker at his own expense so that he could better capture that skill set for a single scene. Duvall also called in a “quick-draw specialist” to hone his skills with a firearm.

“He wasn’t just being thorough or method-y,” Sweeney says. “It was all very specific to what his character is going to do in the movie.”

And, Sweeney adds, Duvall had fun along the way. Always.

Those lessons hit home for the rising star, who landed key roles early in his career with films like “Gardens of Stone” (1987), “Eight Men Out” (1988), and “The Cutting Edge” (1992).

Troubling subject

He’s been working ever since, including a part in 2024’s “Megalopolis,” Francis Ford Coppola’s return to filmmaking after a 13-year pause.

Now, he’s co-starring in “Protector,” an action yarn hitting theaters today in which a military veteran (Milla Jovovich) is forced to use her skills to save her daughter from human traffickers. Sweeney describes his role as like the corrupt cop Brian Dennehy played in 1982’s “First Blood.”

He says the new film has some of that Sylvester Stallone hit in its creative DNA, along with the 2008 smash “Taken.” The troubling subject matter hit home for Sweeney, from the unending Epstein files saga to his own experience around major cultural events.

“It’s a huge problem,” he says of sex trafficking.

“Protector” casts Jovovich as a heroine who uses her military background for good. It’s a far cry from how Hollywood depicted soldiers during the 2000s, a time when many films showed the darkest side of the U.S. military.

Think “Redacted” (2007), “Lions for Lambs” (2007), and “Green Zone” (2010).

Nailing the details

More recent films like “Thank You for Your Service” (2017) and “American Sniper” (2014) showed a more balanced side to the modern soldier. Sweeney credits part of that shift to studios leaning on military veterans as advisers. That not only helps nail the smaller details but influences storytelling in general.

That has impacted him, too.

He worked on the CBS series “Jericho,” a postapocalyptic thriller that relied on military veterans for military accuracy. Sweeney bonded with the veterans advising the show along the way.

At 64, Sweeney is still working in an industry that’s convulsing under the weight of new technologies and streaming wars. AI fears aren’t make-believe, he warns.

“I’m worried about actors being replaced with digital avatars. That’s a real thing,” he says. It helps that “Protector” relied on old-school stunt work over CGI trickery. He says that’s what could help his fellow artists: a reliance on authenticity over digital ones and zeroes.

“It’s one thing AI can’t master,” he says.

Mega moviemaking

His time on the set of “Megalopolis” reminded him how hard it can be to shoot a film, above and beyond the standard-issue struggles like budget constraints and evasive sunlight. The film endured brutal headlines tied to sexual harassment allegations against the 80-something Coppola.

Sweeney, who first worked with the legendary director on “Gardens of Stone,” has the auteur’s back.

“I was there almost every day. He’s a hugger,” he says of Coppola. “He doesn’t have a pervy bone in his body.”

Those salacious reports, plus talk of the film’s massive budget ($120 million), hurt the film’s box office tally.

“The movie got put into a box before anyone has seen it,” he says.

RELATED: EXCLUSIVE: DB Sweeney on surviving Hollywood and moving to ‘Megalopolis’

Michael Loccisano/Getty Images

Staying in the light

Some actors who came of age alongside Sweeney saw Hollywood’s seedy side. Think Charlie Sheen, his co-star in “Eight Men Out.” Sheen is currently on a comeback of sorts after years of hard living and outlandish behavior.

Sweeney didn’t follow that path, but he saw it all the same.

“I was invited to all the biggest parties, a dark underbelly with drugs and sex. … I couldn’t put my finger on it, but I knew this is not for me,” he says. “I gravitated toward using my celebrity for sports tickets. That’s a much more wholesome world to me.”

Others weren’t so fortunate, and he understands why.

“There’s so much desperation. People want to be famous so bad, that energy leads to some dark pathways. You’ll do anything to get that fame,” he says. “People talk about selling their soul to Satan for fame. It’s figuratively true.”

​Entertainment, Culture, Movies, Protector, D.b. sweeney, Epstein files, Hollywood, Align interview 

Wanting to get breast implants as a stunt led to “Jackass” star Steve-O believing transgender-identified people are oppressed.

In 2024, the stuntman planned to get the surgery done for the sake of comedy, telling podcaster Joe Rogan, “This is where the bar is at.”

‘You can’t escape your f**king chromosomes.’

However, the plan fell through when an absent anesthesiologist delayed the procedure. While a doctor was trying to reschedule Steve-O — real name Stephen Gilchrist Glover — the 51-year-old recalled having a change of heart after speaking with a transgender person at a grocery store.

He told Rogan that the “level of oppression” described to him by the person “genuinely f**king broke my heart.”

Washroom woes

“They said, ‘Hey, let me tell you, I am not allowed to use the bathroom at my own place of work,'” Steve-O claimed before Rogan immediately jumped in.

“That’s not true. They’re just not allowed to use the bathroom that doesn’t align with their biological sex,” Rogan began.

Recognizing the reality of “gender dysphoria,” Rogan said at least some men were being given a “golden ticket to go into the women’s locker room … and pretend you’re a woman when you’re just a crazy man and you’re actually into women.”

He added, “You can’t escape your f**king chromosomes … what you’re dealing with is a form of gender dysphoria, which has always been classified as a mental illness until people became much more empathetic and sensitive to people that have this problem.”

Camp canard

In one of several cases where Steve-O agreed he had been out-dueled, he then moved on to his next claim: that politicians are trying to put transgender people “in internment camps.”

RELATED: Two trans-identifying men file lawsuit against ‘dehumanizing’ Kansas law that invalidated their driver’s licenses

While Rogan agreed there “might be one kook” trying to get attention, he added, “There’s no movement to try to put transgender people in internment camps.”

Steve-O’s claim likely stemmed from reports about Republican Rep. Nancy Mace (S.C.), who was speaking about Charlie Kirk’s alleged assassin’s alleged transgender partner.

“It was a transgender. … It was a tranny,” Mace said to reporters in 2024. Noting that she has received death threats from transgender activists, she added, “They are mentally ill and should be in a straight jacket with a hard steel lock on it.”

As well, Republican Rep. Ronny Jackson (Texas) told Newsmax that transgender people have “legitimate psychiatric issues.”

“We have to do something about this, we have to treat these people, we have to get them off the streets, and we have to get them off the internet, and we can’t let them communicate with one another.”

His statements were also in response to Kirk’s assassination, and both his and Mace’s remarks were made within five days of Kirk’s death. The comments were labeled as calls for institutionalization by some outlets, but there does not appear to be any mention of “internment camps” by any politicians.

Tapping out

During the discussion, Rogan also told Steve-O that transgender people had actually been responsible for more death than Immigration and Customs Enforcement, an agency Steve-O had spoken out against in February.

RELATED: Supreme Court sides with Catholic parents against California on student gender notification — for now

Photo by Axelle/Bauer-Griffin/FilmMagic

“Do you know who’s killed more people than ICE this year? Trans shooters. Do you know the majority of these high school shootings have been transgender people?” Rogan asked.

“I did not know that,” Steve-O replied.

After Rogan referenced medications and hormones as not being good to mix with “mental struggles,” being “ostracized,” and propaganda about trans “genocide,” Steve-O soon admitted that Rogan was making good points.

“You’ve convinced me,” the stuntman said.

Rogan then summarized his argument by comparing it to a country’s borders.

“Can’t have an open border. Doesn’t mean that all immigrants are murderers. … But some people that sneak across the border, if you don’t check, are going to be murderers. It’s just a fact. So you have to have a f**king closed border to check. And you have to have a gender border too.”

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

​Align, Joe rogan, Podcast, Steve-o, Gender, Women’s sports, Bathroom, Transgenderism, Entertainment 

Jasmine Crockett has long been a source of entertainment for BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales, who is upset that the congresswoman lost to James Talarico in her bid for a Texas Senate seat.

“We lost Jasmine Crockett. … I am actually upset about it,” Gonzales says, before playing a clip of Crockett angrily responding to the news that she would not immediately have election results on election night.

“My news is that we’re not going to have election results tonight, in my opinion, based upon what specifically is taking place in Dallas County. Unfortunately, this is what Republicans like to do. And so they specifically targeted Dallas County. And I think we all know why,” Crockett announced while she was waiting for the voting results.

“Maybe I’m the dumb one … Republicans didn’t vote in the Democrat primary, so I’m unclear on how Republicans cheated. I don’t know, like orange man bad. It must be Donald Trump’s fault,” Gonzales comments, before playing another clip of Crockett’s speech.

“But I can tell you now that people have been disenfranchised,” Crockett said.

After feeling as though she’d been cheated out of the Senate, Crockett is now calling for Americans to “remain resilient” and not allow cheaters to be “rewarded.”

“We encourage each and every one of you to remain resilient. We cannot allow this type of behavior to be rewarded because so long as they know that they can win, even if it means cheating, then they will continue to do it,” Crockett said in another speech.

“Uh, can we get Jasmine’s opinion on the SAVE Act?” Gonzales asks. “Cause like, I don’t know, maybe you guys should all support the SAVE Act and then there will be no more cheating.”

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, Upload, Video, Camera phone, Video phone, Free, Youtube.com, Sara gonzales unfiltered, Sara gonzales, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Republicans, Democrats, Jasmine crockett, James talarico, Texas senate race 

The employment situation report for February was released on Friday, showing a slowdown after an ostensibly strong start to the year.

The United States lost 92,000 nonfarm jobs in February, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics report.

The unemployment rate saw a slight uptick compared to January, rising 0.1% to 4.4% in February.

The Hill reported that economists were confronted with an unexpected downturn in total jobs, saying they generally expected the United States to add 60,000.

Additionally, The Hill marked a concerning trend, reporting that the BLS revised December 2025’s initial gain of 48,000 jobs to a loss of 17,000 jobs.

However, consistent with previous trends in President Trump’s first year, the federal government accounted for 10,000 of those jobs losses. BLS reported that federal employment is down by 330,000, or 11% of the federal workforce.

RELATED: ‘Golden Age of America is upon us!’ Delayed January jobs report exceeds expectations

CentrallTAlliance/Getty Images

The unemployment rate saw a slight uptick compared to January, rising 0.1% to 4.4% in February.

“Just as the January jobs report overstated any emerging strength in the labor market, the February employment data give a false impression of deteriorating labor market conditions,” Nancy Vanden Houten, lead economist at Oxford Economics, said in an email to CBS News on Friday.

The employment situation report for March is scheduled to be released on April 3.

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

​Politics, President trump, Donald trump, Trump, Jobs report, Employment situation report, United states, The hill, Bureau of labor statistics, February jobs 

Tuesday’s Senate Republican primary election in Texas between incumbent Sen. John Cornyn and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton triggered a runoff after neither received at least 50% of the vote.

Heading into the May 26 runoff election, both Cornyn and Paxton are hoping to secure President Donald Trump’s endorsement.

‘That is bad for him. So maybe, maybe that leads me to go the other direction.’

Trump has stated he will endorse one of the candidates, but that he expects the one he does not select to withdraw his bid.

Paxton appeared to stir up some drama with the president when he stated on Wednesday evening that he would continue in the race even if Trump decides to support Cornyn.

Trump, who told Politico on Thursday that he will announce his support for one of the candidates “pretty soon,” seemed to scold Paxton, stating that it is “bad for him to say” that he would not leave the race.

“That is bad for him. So maybe, maybe that leads me to go the other direction,” Trump told Politico, indicating that Paxton’s comments may prompt him to endorse Cornyn.

RELATED: Trump to intervene in Texas’ Senate race, anoint his preferred candidate

Ken Paxton. Photo by Brandon Bell/Getty Images

Later that day, Paxton walked back his earlier statement, writing in a post on X that he would “consider” withdrawing from the race if Senate leadership passes the SAVE America Act.

“The Save America Act is the most important bill the U.S. Senate could ever pass, and I’m committed to helping President Trump get it done,” Paxton said.

“John Cornyn is a coward who has refused to support abolishing the filibuster to pass this bill. Now, Fake News reporters and the establishment are trying to destroy me with misinformation.”

“The truth is clear: No one has been more loyal to Donald Trump than me — fighting the stolen 2020 election, being in Mar-a-Lago when he announced his 2024 campaign, and standing with him in NY in the face of lawfare,” Paxton continued. “For the good of our country and for the good of passing President Trump’s agenda, I am determined to help him get this done.”

RELATED: Jasmine Crockett claims voters were ‘disenfranchised’ following crushing defeat in key Texas primary

John Cornyn. Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images

In his comments to Politico, Trump described the Democrat nominee, state Rep. James Talarico, as “a terribly weak candidate.”

Talarico defeated his opponent, Rep. Jasmine Crockett, by over 7.5 points on Tuesday.

Trump expressed confidence that a Republican candidate could defeat Talarico, concluding that he is “more woke than even the very highly untalented Jasmine Crockett.”

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

​News, Donald trump, Trump, Ken paxton, James talarico, Jasmine crockett, John cornyn, Texas, Politics 

A Wisconsin nurse who accused a patient of sexually assaulting her is headed to prison after investigators discovered she fabricated the accusations and repeatedly engaged in consensual sexual intercourse with the patient, according to authorities.

The Monroe County District Attorney’s Office announced Monday that Melissa R. Knutson of Readstown pleaded guilty to misconduct in public office and obstructing an officer.

‘Not only did she violate the sacred trust between a patient and a nurse, but she compounded that by falsely accusing the patient of sexual assault.’

Juneau County Circuit Court Judge Paul Curran sentenced Knutson to 18 months of initial confinement in state prison, followed by two years of extended supervision for the conviction of misconduct in public office.

Knutson also received a concurrent 180-day jail sentence for obstructing an officer.

The district attorney’s office said Knutson was a nurse assigned to a drug court participant with whom she “repeatedly engaged in sexual intercourse.”

“When the facts of her intercourse with a patient/participant were reported to the Wisconsin Department of Safety and Professional Services, Knutson responded by falsely accusing the patient of sexual assault,” the district attorney’s statement read.

However, investigators determined that Knutson “fabricated that allegation to avoid consequences for her sex acts with the patient/participant,” the DA’s office stated.

Knutson later confessed to lying about being sexually assaulted by the patient in a letter and with her guilty plea, according to the district attorney.

RELATED: How a rope and free STD test exposed a South Dakota woman’s fake rape accusation as an extramarital tryst in Florida

Monroe County District Attorney Kevin Croninger declared that Knutson caused “deep and significant” harm.

“Not only did she violate the sacred trust between a patient and a nurse, but she compounded that by falsely accusing the patient of sexual assault,” Croninger said.

The DA noted, “This situation is particularly egregious given the patient in this situation was a participant in drug court.”

Croninger said all of the officers who worked on the case “demonstrated a tremendous commitment to seeking the truth, through evidence.”

“All involved take every sexual assault very seriously,” Croninger said in the press release. “When Ms. Knutson reported she was sexually assaulted, that allegation was taken seriously.”

Croninger praised the officers for being “highly professional in investigating that allegation and determining that Ms. Knutson was lying.”

“Officers then completed an extremely thorough and effective investigation, which uncovered a plethora of evidence that Ms. Knutson was in fact the perpetrator, not the victim,” Croninger continued.

Croninger warned that investigators’ commitment to seeking the truth prevented a possible “unjust result.”

“Instead, the truth was discovered, and justice was served,” Croninger proclaimed.

Judge Curran described Knutson’s actions as “despicable” and stressed that she was “an embarrassment to nurses everywhere.”

Curran said Knutson’s purported remorse was “a mile wide and an inch deep.”

According to the Wisconsin Department of Safety and Professional Services, Knutson has had her nursing license suspended.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services describes drug courts as alternatives to incarceration and places to “help participants recover from use disorder with the aim of reducing future criminal activity.”

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

​Crime, Fake rape accusation, Fake rape allegations, False sexual assault accusation, Melissa knutson, Melissa knutson arrest, Melissa knutson nurse, Sexual assault, Wisconsin 

Do the protesters angry about Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s death hate America — or do they hate the fact that Donald Trump pulled it off?

The question sounds simple. Nobody outside Khamenei’s supporters can mourn his death. The answer becomes more difficult because the protesters in question rarely limit their hatred to one target.

Trump’s return tore off the mask. When America acts like America again, the people who resent America stop hiding behind the language of peace.

Almost 15 years ago, U.S. Navy SEALs killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. Bin Laden led Al-Qaeda, which carried out terrorist attacks against the United States and others for years. The worst came on Sept. 11, 2001, when Al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked four American airliners, flew three into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, and crashed the fourth in Pennsylvania. Nearly 3,000 people died.

When President Obama announced bin Laden’s death, he said: “Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader; he was a mass murderer of Muslims. Indeed, Al-Qaeda has slaughtered scores of Muslims in many countries, including our own. So his demise should be welcomed by all who believe in peace and human dignity.”

Nobody marched in grief for bin Laden — at least not publicly outside Al-Qaeda’s circles, which included Iran.

Khamenei’s record goes further. Under his rule, Iran financed terrorism across the region and around the globe. The U.S. State Department reported in 2020 that Iran “has been the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism,” and for more than 40 years, its “malign behavior and support for terrorist proxies has spread across the region.”

Iran’s clients form a who’s-who of the heinous: Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Shiite militias in Iraq, and others. For nearly half a century, Iran’s regime threatened Iranians first, then the Middle East, then the United States and Israel.

The beneficiaries of that system were predictable: regime insiders, terrorist networks, and pariah states that profit from chaos — Russia, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela — along with China, which seeks advantage from the disorder Iran helped sow.

So who, exactly, shows up in America to lament Khamenei’s death and denounce U.S. strikes as illegitimate?

The protests arrived quickly in familiar cities: New York, Minneapolis, Portland.

The left-wing Guardian observed that New York’s rally was sponsored by a host of left-wing groups that included the ANSWER Coalition, National Iranian American Council, 50501, American Muslims for Palestine, the People’s Forum, Palestinian Youth Movement, Code Pink, Black Alliance for Peace, and Democratic Socialists of America. Organizers called Trump’s strikes “unprovoked” and “illegal,” warned of “unthinkable death and destruction,” and promised to take to the streets.

RELATED: Hegseth just delivered a precision strike on the legacy media

Photo by Brendan SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images

They did not explain how action against a regime that has sponsored terrorism for decades and chants “Death to America” qualifies as “unprovoked.”

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani (D) went further, calling the strikes a “catastrophic escalation in an illegal war of aggression,” then added: “Bombing cities. Killing civilians. Opening a new theater of war.”

He ignored the war Iran has waged for years through its proxies. He also ignored the brutality Iran’s regime has inflicted on its own people. Reports from within and outside Iran have described mass crackdowns, large death tolls, and systematic violence against dissent. The precise numbers vary — it could top 30,000 — and the regime itself manipulates information, but nobody disputes the core point: Tehran kills its own citizens to preserve power.

Minneapolis offered the same posture. Minnesota Public Radio quoted Andrew Josefchak of the Minnesota Anti-War Committee saying: “These wars don’t benefit ordinary people in the U.S., and they certainly don’t benefit ordinary people in countries like Venezuela or Iran.” That claim dodges the obvious. Iranians have risked their lives for decades against this regime. Many celebrated Khamenei’s death because they know what his rule meant.

In Portland, a protest organized by Portland for Palestine featured signs reading “U.S. hands off Iran” and “Stop the war on Iran now.” Hamas, Iran’s most prominent Palestinian client, tells you plenty about the moral framing at work.

The sympathies here are not hard to locate. The protesters show little concern for the victims of Iran’s terror machine, whether in Israel, Iraq, or inside Iran itself. Their energy targets the United States — and Trump.

If that judgment sounds harsh, consider a post from a Columbia University group that has organized activism since 2024. Columbia University Apartheid Divest posted “Marg bar Amrika” on X.com — “Death to America” in Persian — then later wrote that the platform forced deletion to regain account access but that “the sentiment still stands.”

RELATED: Conservatives can’t barbecue their way through national collapse

Blaze Media Illustration

That brings the question into focus.

Iran chanted “Death to America” long before Trump entered politics. The chant softened in elite American spaces when Washington adopted a posture of accommodation. Under Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, the United States projected restraint even as Iran financed proxies and pushed its nuclear program forward. Now with Trump back in office and Khamenei dead, “Death to America” appears on social media feeds tied to elite American campuses.

So what do these protesters hate more: America or Trump?

They carry plenty of hate for both. The better answer may be that Trump’s return tore off the mask. When America acts like America again, the people who resent America stop hiding behind the phony language of peace.

​Opinion & analysis, Iran war, Donald trump, Death to america, Ayatollah ali khamenei, Osama bin laden, Al qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Protest, Subversion, Islam, Houthis, Jihad, Answer coalition, Leftism, Leftists, Zohran mamdani, Columbia university 

Second Amendment advocates are celebrating after a D.C. appeals court struck down a local ban on high-capacity magazines.

On Thursday, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals handed down a 2-1 decision in Tyree Benson v. United States and the District of Columbia, ruling that a local law banning gun magazines that can contain more than 10 rounds is unconstitutional.

‘We agree with Benson and the United States that the District’s outright ban on them violates the Second Amendment.’

Appellant Tyree Benson was arrested in October 2022 on multiple charges related to possession of a Glock 45 9mm caliber handgun with a high-capacity magazine that could hold 30 rounds of ammunition.

The opinion argued that the ubiquity of high-capacity magazines makes enforcing or justifying an outright ban extremely difficult.

Magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition are ubiquitous in our country, numbering in the hundreds of millions, accounting for about half of the magazines in the hands of our citizenry, and they come standard with the most popular firearms sold in America today. Because these magazines are arms in common and ubiquitous use by law-abiding citizens across this country, we agree with Benson and the United States that the District’s outright ban on them violates the Second Amendment.

RELATED: Want a machine gun? These states might soon make buying one easier

Photo by SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images

The opinion of the court was written by Trump appointee Associate Judge Joshua Deahl, who was joined by Obama appointee Catharine Friend Easterly.

In her dissent, Chief Judge Anna Blackburne-Rigsby argued in part that the majority’s argument failed to address the unusually high capacity in this case, whereas many gun owners have guns with 11-, 15-, or 17-round magazines. Additionally, she defended the law by applying the historical legal standard of banning “dangerous and unusual” weapons, though that standard is controversial.

The District of Columbia, which upholds the ban and is another party in the suit, could appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court or request that a larger panel from the local appeals court reconsider it, the New York Times reported.

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

​Politics, United states, Appeals court, High capacity magazine, D.c, District of columbia, Anna blackburne-rigsby, Glock, Tyree benson, Constitution, Second amendment, Trump, Obama, Donald trump, 2a 

Cracker Barrel just had its quarterly earnings meeting, during which the CEO admitted she does not have “a crystal ball.”

Sales have decreased since the 2025 logo and branding change that saw Cracker Barrel deliver the biggest marketing blunder of the year. The shift was so bad that the new branding became a national story, and the board member who pushed for it soon resigned.

‘We know we are headed in the right direction.’

Still looking to recover from the disaster, Cracker Barrel put out its second quarter fiscal report for 2026 on Wednesday, and the report showed significant losses for a company of its size.

Total revenue took a hit, decreasing by 7.9% compared to the year before. Restaurant revenue dropped by 7.5%, with management explaining that traffic had declined by more than 10%.

In the earnings call, CEO Julie Masino — who was at the helm when the new store design failed — boasted to investors about the restaurant’s Google review rating, one of the few highlights.

“Our Google star rating, which over the long run is strongly correlated with traffic, was 4.28 in Q2,” Masino stated, noting that it was a six-year high. “This represents the highest quarterly score since Q2 in fiscal year 2020.”

RELATED: Board member behind Cracker Barrel DEI rebranding disaster resigns after pressure — including from Glenn Beck

Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images

While Masino said, “I do not have a crystal ball,” and that she does not have a “correlation that says when scores improve by X, traffic follows,” she was confident that the company’s “indicators” still correlate to “growth and improvement.”

In addition to the Google reviews, Masino cited increased guest satisfaction scores, lower manager turnover, improved traffic within the quarter, and a “meaningful percentage” of guests returning who did not visit in previous quarters.

“We know we are headed in the right direction, and everybody is working hard to make that a reality,” Masino added.

The CEO also boasted about the restaurant’s business during Thanksgiving week 2025, which she called “a big week for us.”

However, despite bringing in $110 million in sales, which represents between 12% and 13% of total revenue for the quarter, “Thanksgiving traffic was in line with the rest of the month, so it did not crazily outperform or anything like that,” Masino admitted.

RELATED: ‘I feel like I’ve been fired by America’: Cracker Barrel CEO nearly brought to tears over redesign backlash

“Our disciplined focus on operational excellence is driving significant improvements in several key guest metrics, many of which serve as important leading traffic indicators,” Masino said in the company’s press release. “We have also taken additional actions to improve financial performance and remain confident that we are well-positioned to regain prior momentum.”

In the end, the board of directors still declared a quarterly dividend of $0.25 per share, and the company is still expanding ever so slightly with the opening of two new stores.

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

​News, Cracker barrel, Ceo, Marketing, 2025, Americana, Restaurant, Politics 

The latest Texas primary elections are sending signals that have Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck deeply concerned about the future of the state — and the country.

Specifically because Glenn believes voters might look at Republican candidates Ken Paxton and John Cornyn — and see something fresh in James Talarico.

“He strikes me as dangerous, because you’re going to get — there’s a thing in Texas where I think Texans see scandal and they don’t like scandal at all. And that, I guess, is a good thing, but not when the scandal blinds you to who the other person is,” Glenn explains.

“And Talarico seems like a very good, smooth talker that can do exactly what happened in Virginia and say, ‘Hey, I’m a moderate; I’m just following the words of Christ. I just care about my fellow man.’ And then next thing you know, old Jed’s a millionaire who has had all of his money taken by the federal government for some stupid crazy program,” he continues.

And Cornyn does not give Glenn the greatest hope either.

“I would have a really hard time voting for Cornyn. It would take everything in me to check that box for Cornyn. Everything in me to check that box. And the only reason I would do it is because I would know who Talarico is,” Glenn says.

“But most Republicans are not going to pay that much attention, and they’re going to see this guy as, ‘Oh, you know what? I don’t really like Cornyn, and I’m kind of sick of Cornyn here. What has he done lately? We need some fresh blood in there. And this guy seems like a good guy of God,’” he continues, before sending Texans a powerful message.

“I’m telling you, Talarico is a real, real danger, especially with the way things are running in Texas. I’m telling you: We lose Texas, we lose the country forever. And Texans, wake the hell up,” he says.

“It’s not the Texas that it used to be. It’s not. They’re moving in from California,” he says. “What do you think they’re going to vote for?”

Want more from Glenn Beck?

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

​Video phone, Free, Camera phone, Upload, Sharing, Video, Youtube.com, The glenn beck program, Glenn beck, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Texas, Texans, James talarico, Senate, Jasmine crockett 

Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas) declared Thursday that he would no longer seek re-election for Texas’ 23rd Congressional District seat.

Neither Gonzales nor his opponent, firearms influencer Brandon Herrera, secured enough votes in Tuesday’s Republican primary race, triggering a runoff election on May 26. Gonzales and Herrera previously faced off in a 2024 runoff election, where Gonzales narrowly won.

‘Through the rest of my term, I will continue fighting for my constituents, for whom I am eternally grateful.’

Gonzales initially dismissed rumors that he had had an affair with a former staffer who later committed suicide by setting herself on fire, claiming that the allegations were smear tactics to sabotage his re-election campaign. However, on Wednesday, Gonzales publicly admitted to the affair.

“I made a mistake,” he said. “I had a lapse in judgment, and there was a lack of faith. And I take full responsibility for those actions.”

On Thursday, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), who previously endorsed Gonzales, called on him to withdraw from the race and noted that the Ethics Committee had opened an investigation into the lawmaker’s conduct.

RELATED: House passes the buck on Mace’s push for sexual misconduct disclosure amid Tony Gonzales scandal

Tony Gonzales. Photo By Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

Later that evening, Gonzales issued a statement announcing his withdrawal from the race.

“After deep reflection and with the support of my loving family, I have decided not to seek re-election while serving out the rest of this Congress with the same commitment I’ve always had to my district,” Gonzales wrote. “Through the rest of my term, I will continue fighting for my constituents, for whom I am eternally grateful.”

Gonzales’ decision to withdraw secures Herrera’s bid as the Republican candidate for the 23rd Congressional District seat in Texas. Herrera will run against Democrat Katy Padilla Stout.

RELATED: Speaker Johnson tells Tony Gonzales to drop re-election bid after affair admission

Brandon Herrera. Photo by Brandon Bell/Getty Images

Herrera responded to Gonzales’ announcement, writing, “I appreciate Tony Gonzales for making the appropriate decision.”

“I look forward to being the voice of TX23 that our district deserves. From the border, to oil theft, water rights, data centers, and many other issues,” Herrera continued. “It’s an honor to be chosen and together we will make Texas proud.”

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

​News, Tony gonzales, Mike johnson, Brandon herrera, Texas, Katy padilla stout, Politics 

Here in America, we tend to treat racism as our defining moral emergency. Careers collapse over it, and institutions reorganize around preventing it.

Yet we seem unable to distinguish deliberate racial animus from the mere presence of a forbidden word. The recent ugly incident at the BAFTAs — and its even uglier aftermath — makes this painfully clear.

Forced into public contrition to satisfy a ritual demand for outrage.

One of the films honored at this year’s ceremony was “I Swear,” a dramatized biography of Tourette syndrome advocate John Davidson. In attendance was Davidson himself.

Disruptive and involuntary

Tourette syndrome is a neurological disorder marked by involuntary motor and vocal tics that range from mild movements to disruptive speech; Davidson suffers from coprolalia (essentially Latin for “sh**t-talking”) — the rare but notorious form involving uncontrollable obscenities that, in the popular imagination, has come to stand in for the entire condition.

“I Swear” portrays the trials of living with such a condition, which at one point led Davidson to attempt suicide by walking into a river. It depicts a man who has been bullied, punched, and otherwise assaulted throughout his life because he can’t stop himself from saying the wrong thing at the wrong time.

Even in his moment of triumph — with the film about his life winning five awards, including Best British Film, Best Actor, and Best Screenplay — Davidson’s Tourette syndrome came back to haunt him.

‘The opposite of what I believe’

Throughout the evening, Davidson experienced multiple vocal tics. While actors Michael B. Jordan and Delroy Lindo were presenting an award, one of those involuntary outbursts included the N-word. As Davidson would later tell Variety, he “ticked perhaps 10 different offensive words” that night; the racial slur was one among several.

Davidson added, “What you hear me shouting is literally the last thing in the world I believe; it is the opposite of what I believe. The most offensive word that I ticked at the ceremony … is a word I would never use and would completely condemn if I did not have Tourette’s.”

The audience had been warned in advance that vocal tics, including involuntary swearing, could occur.

Insult before injury

Host Alan Cumming addressed the incident from the stage, asking for “understanding” and apologizing “if you were offended.” Not long after, Davidson chose to leave the auditorium, later explaining that he was aware that his condition was causing distress.

But in the aftermath of the incident, some black Hollywood elites were quick to ignore the medical context in favor of moral condemnation. Actor Wendell Pierce wrote on X that “it doesn’t matter the reasoning for the racist slur,” insisting that “the insult … takes priority.”

Jamie Foxx, commenting on an Instagram post, was blunter: “Nah, he meant that s**t.”

“Sinners” production designer Hannah Beachler, who attended the ceremony, argued that the apology fell short, calling it a “throw away” response.

But the awkwardness of Alan Cumming’s on-stage apology — “if you were offended” — reflected an unusual moral dilemma To apologize unequivocally on Davidson’s behalf would have implied agency and culpability, as though a neurological disorder were a character defect. Yet to say nothing would have signaled indifference to the inflammatory power of the word.

Davidson himself drew the line the following day. “Whilst I will never apologize for having Tourette syndrome,” he said, “I will apologize for any pain, upset and misunderstanding that it may create.”

Permissible sin

Davidson was a careful to separate regret from guilt. But such nuance is apparently not possible where this particular slur is concerned. In America, we are expected to believe that uttering the N-word — regardless of intent or context — is one of the worst moral assaults any person can commit.

And so a man whose disorder makes him incapable of controlling certain outbursts was forced into public contrition to satisfy a ritual demand for outrage. The reaction was less about justice than about reaffirming the hierarchy of permissible sin.

You could ask for no better illustration of the kind of race-based narcissism our country has encouraged in attempting to atone for its genuinely racist past. By treating black Americans as permanently wounded and permanently aggrieved — so that even a wealthy and powerful celebrity like Foxx can feel victimized by someone like Davidson — we see them not as individuals, but as almost sacred symbols.

This attitude is dehumanizing. It denies agency. We all know that Foxx’s accusation is wrong; Davidson didn’t “mean” to offend. But there’s a sense in which we assume Foxx himself “can’t help” but react the way he did. After all, this is the N-word we’re talking about.

This is the same infantilizing impulse that makes honest discussion about persistent dysfunction in parts of the black community — crime, family instability, educational failure — feel radioactive.

RELATED: Tourette advocate’s BAFTA slur gets no empathy from stars

Aurore Marechal/Getty Images

Grandiose traits

The theory seems to be that black people have been so oppressed by pervasive “systemic racism” that it isn’t possible to hold them morally accountable in the same way you would anyone else. We’ve spent the last decade hearing about the “white supremacy” at the heart of America. This isn’t just an opinion — it’s actual science!

But there is some other science that complicates this story of permanent psychic injury. Decades of research have found that black Americans report higher average levels of self-esteem than white Americans.

And some research even shows that this can tip into pathology. A 2011 study in the Journal of Personality Research titled “Racial Differences in Narcissistic Tendencies” found higher self-reported levels of certain grandiose narcissistic traits among black participants.

Tourette’s-induced slurs are, of course, are not a widespread occurrence. But it’s worth noticing how the BAFTA incident strips the issue to its essentials. A mature society should be able to hold two ideas at once: that racial slurs are degrading and historically charged and that neurological conditions are real and mitigating.

If we can’t, we have a deeper problem. The woke era’s tendency to see racism everywhere means our current moral reflexes are less about serving truth than they are about protecting a narrative. The more we allow this collective delusion to take hold, the harder it will be to speak plainly to each other. A society that cannot speak honestly about motive and meaning will not remain merely confused; it will grow brittle. And brittle things tend to break under pressure.

​Narcissism, Lifestyle, Tourette’s, Tourette syndrome, Movies, Baftas, Jamie foxx, Racism, John davidson, Entertainment, Intervention 

President Donald Trump doesn’t tiptoe around the obvious. Even in his State of the Union address, he put dangerous, destructive realities in blunt terms.

So why doesn’t it land?

Many people cling to nonsense even when the nonsense has been exposed.

Why do ordinary people hear the twisted “logic” of the woke mindset and not respond with the only reasonable reaction: What?! That doesn’t even make sense!

Consider three simple propositions Trump has stated plainly.

“There are two sexes.”

“Men masquerading as women do not belong in women’s sports.”

“The first duty of the American government is to protect American citizens, not illegal aliens.”

Most Americans answer those without breaking a sweat: Yes. Of course. Move on.

Glenn Beck noted that the third line — “protect American citizens, not illegal aliens” — should land like Ronald Reagan’s “Tear down this wall!” A statement so clean should do serious damage to the Democrat brand — maybe even serve as the kill shot.

And yet we keep watching the same evasions, the same doublespeak, the same manufactured confusion. Even when someone drags the truth into the light, too many people stare at it and blink.

That’s the puzzle. Once a fact is stated plainly in a public forum, shouldn’t observers think: Of course, I see it! I knew it all along!

Learning is supposed to work that way. A rational mind stores what it sees and hears. When new evidence appears, it updates. When a similar situation comes along, it draws on what it already knows and responds accordingly.

So what explains the opposite? What explains a person seeing something that is as plain as day and still refusing to interpret it correctly?

Some cases are easy. Some people are self-deluded. Some are wicked. Some know they’re lying and do it anyway for profit, power, or self-aggrandizement. They surround themselves with gullible followers and use them.

Set those cases aside for a moment. Even then, you still face a stubborn reality: Many people cling to nonsense even when the nonsense has been exposed.

RELATED: The common-sense case for nationalizing US elections

Photo by SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images

That’s where a grim insight from Dietrich Bonhoeffer may help. Bonhoeffer wrote from a prison cell in Nazi Germany and reflected on “stupidity.” His point wasn’t that stupid people score poorly on tests. His point was moral and social: A person can become hardened against reason itself. He wrote:

Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice. One may protest against evil; it can be exposed and, if need be, prevented by use of force.

Evil always carries within itself the germ of its own subversion in that it leaves behind in human beings at least a sense of unease.

Against stupidity we are defenseless.

Neither protests nor the use of force accomplish anything here; reasons fall on deaf ears; facts that contradict one’s prejudgment simply need not be believed — in such moments the stupid person even becomes critical — and when facts are irrefutable they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental.

In all this the stupid person, in contrast to the malicious one, is utterly self-satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack.

For this reason, greater caution is called for when dealing with a stupid person than with a malicious one.

Never again will we try to persuade the stupid person with reasons, for it is senseless and dangerous.

In modern vernacular, that insight has been whittled down to “you can’t fix stupid.”

So is that the answer? Does stupidity explain why so many people cannot process statements as basic as “there are two sexes” or “government must protect citizens first”?

Maybe.

Not as a way to sneer at strangers, but as a warning: Once a society trains itself to treat reality as negotiable, argument stops working. The debate stops being about evidence and becomes a test of loyalty, emotion, and power. At that point, the obvious doesn’t fail because it’s unclear. It fails because too many people have learned — willingly or not — to reject clarity.

Editor’s note: A version of this article appeared originally at American Thinker.

​Donald trump, State of the union, Woke mindset, Dietrich bonhoeffer, Two genders, Logical thinking, Woke left, Democrats, Opinion & analysis, Logic, Reason, Argument, Language, Nonsense 

The Iran war risks becoming the classic Washington trap: Trade concrete domestic wins for an open-ended foreign project, then discover the home front slipped away while everyone watched the fireworks.

Over the weekend, the United States joined Israel in the opening salvo of what looked like an increasingly inevitable fight with Iran. Plenty of ink has already spilled over whether Donald Trump should pursue regime change abroad. The larger stakes sit at home. Trump began his second term with an all-out assault on the left and the permanent bureaucracy. Agencies were closed, and budgets were slashed. The border was secured, and deportations began. The early blitz of executive orders stunned progressives, but activist judges soon started tying the administration down. That reality demanded legislative victories

A successful Iran campaign could reshape the region. A failed or prolonged one could reshape American politics by handing Democrats a narrative of chaos and betrayal.

Congress has not delivered. Rather than spend months trying to whip spineless Republicans into motion, the White House shifted toward what it could do without them. Foreign policy offers that outlet. The result includes some impressive operations, including the capture of Nicolás Maduro in Venezuela. Iran, however, threatens to consume time, attention, and political capital that the domestic fight cannot spare.

Curtis Yarvin argues that the most valuable political win makes the next win easier. Power has momentum. Winning in the right order matters more than checking items off an ideological list. Trump’s best early moves fit that logic. They did not merely satisfy the base. They changed the battlefield.

The point is not isolation. America has enemies, and presidents sometimes must use force. The point is sequencing. Domestic consolidation makes foreign action cheaper and safer. A secure border, a disciplined bureaucracy, and election rules that prevent the left from gaming turnout strengthen deterrence.

They also insulate a president from war-party sabotage: leaks, lawsuits, and hearings meant to break public support. The same activists who file injunctions against deportations will file injunctions again against anything that smells like emergency authority. The same media class that demanded escalation yesterday will demand trials and timelines tomorrow. A president who has not locked down the home front fights with one hand tied, then gets blamed when the knot tightens.

Cutting the staff and budget of outfits like USAID and the Department of Education did more than signal hostility to the progressive project. It reduced the flow of money to Democratic patronage networks and throttled the institutions that launder liberal ideology into “expertise.” Closing the border and restarting deportations did more than satisfy a campaign promise. It slowed the importation of new dependents and future Democratic Party supporters. Even the executive order on birthright citizenship, whatever the courts decide, aims at the same long-term terrain: electoral math.

RELATED: The West’s forbidden truth: Ethnic cleansing is now official policy

Blaze Media Illustration

Those moves carried moral clarity and tactical advantage. Each win reduced the opposition’s resources and increased the odds of winning the next fight.

That strategy always faced a limit. Flooding the zone with executive action could only last until the legal system and the administrative state regrouped. Trump is not a dictator, no matter what progressive media claims. He needs laws. Without legislation, judges can block him, bureaucrats can slow-walk him, and the next president can reverse him with a pen.

Once the domestic agenda hit those constraints, the administration pivoted abroad to keep momentum. The question becomes whether momentum abroad strengthens the home front or drains it.

War burns political capital. Trump already took hits from the Epstein files mess and sloppy messaging around deportations. Governing by polls is foolish, but political victories still require public attention and pressure. A president can spend capital only if he has it. People love a winner. They also sour on leaders who appear distracted, trapped, or inconsistent.

Iran poses a special risk because it collides with Trump’s signature advantage: his break with Republican foreign adventurism. He rose by mocking George W. Bush’s regime-change fantasies as disaster. That stance enraged conservative orthodoxies, then remade them. Many pundits who cheered the Iraq War now treat regime change as a punchline largely because Trump made it respectable to say so.

Now Trump bets that the problem was not regime change itself, only its execution. Maybe he wins that bet. He deserves credit for successful strikes and bold operations. Yet the odds do not favor quick, clean wars, and Iran has a long history of swallowing neat plans.

Meanwhile, the domestic agenda needs hard wins that only Congress can supply. The SAVE Act offers the perfect example of a victory that makes the next victory easier. Voter ID is moral and common sense. It enjoys broad support. It constrains the fraud Democrats exploit. It makes every future election easier for Republicans to win. Yet GOP legislators cannot push it across the finish line. The Senate wastes time on performative votes and pageant nonsense. Caligula’s horse starts to look like a personnel upgrade.

RELATED: The commonsense case for nationalizing US elections

Photo by SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images

This imbalance matters because foreign policy creates durable facts, while executive-only domestic wins remain reversible. A successful Iran campaign could reshape the region. A failed or prolonged one could reshape American politics by handing Democrats a narrative of chaos and betrayal. Either way, the clock keeps ticking at home.

If Democrats win the midterms, impeachment and investigations begin immediately. If progressives win the next presidential election, the border reopens, amnesty returns, and the Department of Education fills up again with ideological enforcers. Iran is a brutal regime, but its nuclear program took a major blow last summer. Breathing room existed. The administration should have used it to lock in domestic gains.

Now Trump is committed. That makes speed decisive. A timely victory abroad could preserve the president’s image as a winner while he pressures Congress to codify the domestic agenda. A drawn-out war will do the opposite: sap attention, fracture the coalition, and leave the home front legally vulnerable.

America First cannot survive as a permanent posture if domestic reforms remain temporary. The administration must stop letting foreign battles substitute for unfinished work at home. Win fast abroad if you must. Then come back, and finish the job in Washington.

​America first, Iran, Operation epic fury, Curtis yarvin, Domestic policy, Republicans, Boots on the ground, Opinion & analysis, Donald trump, Forever wars, Israel, Nicolas maduro, Immigration, Birthright citizenship, Elections, 2026 midterms, Save act, Congress, Democrats 

Republican lawmakers in West Virginia and Kentucky are working on making it easier for Americans to acquire fully automatic firearms — a move that might catch on in other red states.

Machine guns — defined by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives as a firearm that can fire “automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger” — are heavily regulated in the United States.

While such weapons can be privately owned, Americans are greatly limited in what they can buy and must jump through numerous hoops to seal the deal.

‘This is our constitutional right.’

Per the Firearm Owners’ Protection Act, civilians are barred from possessing a machine gun manufactured after May 19, 1986. Limited supply means a higher price — Silencer Central says that prospective buyers should expect to spend a minimum of $6,000 to $10,000.

Interested American buyers at least 21 years of age, neither a felon nor a fugitive, and living in a state without a machine gun ban must pass an AFT background check, pay a one-time $200 transfer tax, and get approval from the government in order to take possession. Once those hurdles are cleared, they can take the machine gun home but fire it only on closed target ranges.

In West Virginia, Republican state Sens. Chris Rose and Zack Maynard recently introduced legislation that would establish within the West Virginia State Police an office of public defense that would oversee the procurement and sale of machine guns to “qualified members of the public,” namely any citizen presently eligible to purchase and possess firearms under West Virginia and federal law.

The Cowboy State Daily reported that the new office would be authorized to transfer newer machine guns to state residents.

Blaze News has reached out to state Sen. Rose for clarification about whether out-of-state American citizens would be able to acquire a machine gun from the proposed authority.

RELATED: Virginians oppose Richmond’s war on the Second Amendment: Poll

Photographer: Luke Sharrett/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The preamble of the bill states both that “the Framers understood the Second Amendment to guarantee armament parity between the American citizen and government infantryman” and that “it is in the public interest of the State of West Virginia and its people that American citizens be armed and better able to assist in the defense of the State, and to resist tyranny, using bearable firearms commonly used in modern warfare.”

The legislation would ensure that machine guns made available to citizens in the state through the proposed office would “be the same as, or of like kind to, those machineguns currently in use by law enforcement or the United States Armed Forces, and shall include but not be limited to AR-15/M16-platform, M249-type, and MP5-type Machineguns.”

Kentucky state Rep. TJ Roberts (R) has introduced a nearly identical bill that would create a sub-office within the Kentucky State Police to acquire and transfer guns to qualified Kentuckians.

Roberts stated on X, “Law-abiding Kentuckians should be able to own any type of firearm they choose (including machine guns), as this is our constitutional right.”

The Kentucky version specifies that a “qualified person” is “a person who is eligible to purchase and possess firearms under Kentucky and federal law.” In Kentucky, out-of-state residents who are U.S. citizens have the right to purchase firearms.

Mark Jones, the national director of Gun Owners of America — the organization that authored the bill — told Cowboy State Daily that similar legislation is “doable in Wyoming” and that a Wyoming version of the bill might be introduced next year.

“Prior to the session, I had discussions about it with Wyoming legislators, but we didn’t have enough time to draft a bill,” Jones said. “We decided to focus on the four major (gun-related) bills that are now poised to pass in 2026 and reconsider the 1071 concept next year.”

While recognizing this legal approach as workable, George Mocsary, a law professor at the University of Wyoming and director of the school’s Firearms Research Center, told the Cowboy State Daily that Congress might intervene and overturn the proposed law if passed.

He noted, however, “If it works, I could totally see it catching on, particularly here in Wyoming, and with our northern neighbors in Montana.”

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

​Second amendment, 2a, Guns, Machinegun, Machine gun, Machine guns, Firearms, Weapons, Constitution, West virginia, Kentucky, Wyoming, Politics 

This has probably happened to you at least once: You’re excited to upgrade your iPhone to a shiny new model. You get it all set up with your data and apps. Everything’s ready to go. Then you see it — that glaring red alert in your Settings app that says you’re out of storage. “How is that possible?” you wonder, and rightfully so. Your new phone shouldn’t already be out of storage! Should you buy more? It depends on what that alert actually means and what you can do about it. Let me explain.

iPhone storage explained

Your iPhone comes with two types of storage: local and cloud.

Local storage is the physical storage on your device that saves your apps, settings, data, and more. This is the option you choose when you purchase your phone, and once you walk out of the store, it can’t be changed. You’re stuck with it until the next time you upgrade your device. Most new iPhones come with 256GB or more, but if your device is a little older, it could have even less.

Apple wants you to buy more iCloud storage, even if you don’t necessarily need it.

Cloud storage, or more specifically iCloud storage, is the storage plan attached directly to your Apple account that backups and syncs your apps, settings, and data. All accounts come with 5GB of free storage, and unlike local storage, iCloud can be expanded, to anywhere from 50GB to 12TB, for a recurring monthly fee.

The only way your new iPhone can be out of storage is if you downgraded the storage capacity to an option less than your previous device (for instance, if your old iPhone was a 512GB model and your new one only has 256GB) and your apps no longer fit. Alternatively, iCloud will show an alert when it’s full. Eight times out of 10, the iCloud storage is the problem.

How to check storage levels on iPhone

To be certain, there’s an easy way to check the local storage in your iPhone, as well as the storage in your iCloud account.

RELATED: Out of phone storage? Try this free alternative to updating or upgrading

Photo by Matt Cardy/Getty Images

For local storage, open the Settings app. Tap “General,” then open “iPhone Storage.” It may take a few seconds to a minute for this screen to fully populate, so give it a moment. Once the chart shows up, you’ll see a complete breakdown of your iPhone’s local storage, including downloaded applications, music, photos, messages, and other system data. This is a great way to see which apps take up the most space on your device, and the recommendations section may also tell you which apps you can offload based on your usage habits. If you’re almost out of local storage, you can delete apps from this screen by tapping on an app and hitting the “Delete App” button.

Screenshots by Zach Laidlaw

To check iCloud storage, head back to the beginning of the Settings app. Tap your name at the top of the screen, then “iCloud.” This page shows you a comprehensive breakdown of all the data synced to your iCloud account. To take an even closer look, tap on “Storage” at the top. From here, you can see capacity totals for your device backups, iCloud Drive files, photos, messages, and iCloud-connected apps. If you’re almost out of iCloud storage, you can either upgrade to a higher-tier storage plan, or you can delete old files from your iCloud account to make more room.

Before you do anything, though, there’s one last thing everyone with a new iPhone should do first.

Screenshots by Zach Laidlaw

The real reason your iCloud storage is full

For those with a brand-new iPhone and a storage capacity alert, your iCloud storage is most likely full because a backup of your old iPhone is still saved on your account, taking up vital space that your new iPhone needs for its own backup.

From the main iCloud settings page, tap on “iCloud Backup” to see a complete list of your backed-up Apple devices. This should include your new iPhone, your old iPhone, and possibly an iPad (if you own one). Next, you need to delete the backup of your old phone to make room for your new device.

WARNING: After you delete the backup of your old phone, you will not have a current backup of any iPhone at all until you back up the new model. That means that if something happens to your new phone before you back it up, you will lose some data attached to the phone (like your home screen layout, app settings, and other local files). Other files you have synced to iCloud – like Notes, Messages, Photos, etc. — are not at risk of being lost or deleted. Still, this is why you should immediately run a backup of your new phone to make sure all your data is still safe and secure.

To delete the backup of your old iPhone, tap on your old device, and select “Turn Off and Delete from iCloud” to seal the deal. Lastly, from the same iCloud backup page, select “Back Up Now.” This will create a new backup file for your new device.

Screenshots by Zach Laidlaw

You probably don’t need more storage

As you can see, local iPhone storage and cloud-based iCloud storage are connected to each other, and although you need both of them to keep your device synced and running properly, they’re not the same. The worst part is that Apple doesn’t make a clear enough distinction between the two when one runs out.

The truth is that Apple wants you to buy more iCloud storage, even if you don’t necessarily need it. This is why the company still provides only 5GB of free storage while competitors offer much more. Luckily, there are more ways you can free up storage on iPhone, both from the device and the cloud.

In some cases, iCloud storage upgrades are unavoidable, especially if you own multiple Apple devices backed up to the cloud. But if your old phone was backed up to iCloud without any storage warnings, your new phone will also likely fit after you make room.

Whatever you do, check your physical storage and iCloud storage capacities before you purchase more. There’s a high chance you don’t need an upgrade.

​Tech