Category: blaze media

After a long battle, a D.C. Circuit panel froze a federal judge’s order blocking President Donald Trump’s effort to ban the use of hormones in the military — which would effectively disqualify all transgender people from military service.

The court decided that this policy advances military interests, with two judges ruling in favor and one judge — who was appointed by Obama — dissented.

BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales couldn’t be happier with the decision.

“I definitely don’t think that a man who is mentally ill enough, who thinks that he’s a woman, should be in that realm at all … luckily, this appeals court, well, two out of three of them agreed,” Gonzales says.

BlazeTV host and columnist Auron MacIntyre is pleased with the decision as well, but he points out that it’s not exactly reassuring that the decision came down to several circuit judges.

“It really is terrifying that the effectiveness of our military could come down to whether or not you got the right guy appointed to a particular circuit judgeship. It’s insane that anyone but the commander in chief determines who is or is not in the military,” Macintyre says.

“Military is not a place for you to do your social science experiments or work out your feminist fantasies. Military is a place where we kill people who are trying to murder us. This is literally the most important type of decision you can make,” he continues.

“You do not fool around and try to do some kind of DEI stuff with this,” he adds. “The idea that you would put mentally ill men in the military and put them anywhere near combat … that’s just disgraceful.”

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.

​Free, Video, Upload, Camera phone, Sharing, Video phone, Youtube.com, Sara gonzales unfiltered, Sara gonzales, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Trump trans military ban, Lgbtq agenda, Biden lgbtq military, Pete hegseth, Hormones in military, Trans in military, Transgender, Mental illness, Trans mental illness 

The leftist identitarian organization Black Lives Matter has long been attractive to bad actors keen to manufacture outrage and cash in on liberal guilt. While some BLM activists have already been exposed as criminals, it appears the rot goes far deeper.

The Justice Department announced on Thursday that a federal grand jury has indicted the executive director of Black Lives Matter Oklahoma City, Tashella Sheri Amore Dickerson, on charges of wire fraud and money laundering.

‘It is not about me at all.’

Dickerson, a 52-year-old pro-abortion and pro-Palestinian activist, is accused of embezzling millions of dollars and blowing various funds on recreational travel, shopping, real estate, and even a new vehicle.

Although not itself a registered tax-exempt organization, BLMOKC was apparently able to accept charitable donations through its affiliation with the Open Society Foundations-supported leftist organization Alliance for Global Justice — its fiscal sponsor — on the conditions that it use its funds only as permitted by Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and account for the disbursement of all funds received upon request.

The indictment alleges that the BLMOKC under Dickerson began hitting people and organizations up for cash in a big way around the time of the deadly 2020 BLM riots, ultimately raking in over $5.6 million.

Dickerson told the Oklahoman in July 2020, “It is very humbling to be able to serve my community and help people in this manner. But I also understand it is not about me at all. That it is all about being community.”

The DOJ indicated that BLMOKC was supposed to use grant money from national bail funds to post pretrial bail for race rioters, though it was sometimes permitted to keep some or all of the bail money when returned for the purposes of establishing a revolving bail fund or in service of its supposed “social justice mission.”

It turns out Dickerson had other ideas.

RELATED: University of Minnesota faces backlash over project that seeks to cure the ‘Whiteness Pandemic’

Photo by Ira L. Black/Corbis via Getty Images

According to the indictment, from June 2020 through at least October 2025, Dickerson allegedly embezzled funds from the BLM chapter’s coffers, depositing at least $3.15 million in returned bail checks into her personal accounts.

Rather than use the funds for so-called social justice or to spring thugs from jail, Dickerson allegedly blew the money on trips to Jamaica and the Dominican Republic; on costly retail shopping sprees; on a personal vehicle registered in her name; and on six real estate properties either deeded in her name or in the name of an entity she alone controlled.

Dickerson, who apparently had access to the group’s bank, Paypal, and CashApp accounts since its inception in 2016, also allegedly spent at least $50,000 on food deliveries for herself and her kids.

The indictment alleged further that Dickerson, adding insult to injury, repeatedly submitted false annual reports to Alliance for Global Justice, claiming that she had used the BLM chapter’s funds only for tax-exempt purposes.

“We seek to combat and counter acts of violence, create space for black sustainability and creativity, advocate for non-racist, non-oppressive policies, demand justice, and develop black power,” states the website for Dickerson’s BLM chapter.

The website’s donation page was still up at the time of publication.

Dickerson has been charged with 20 counts of wire fraud and five counts of money laundering. For each wire fraud charge, the BLM activist faces up to 20 years in federal prison and a fine of up to $250,000. For each of the money laundering charges, she faces up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000.

Dickerson indicated in a Facebook video on Thursday she was not in custody and that she was “fine.” While she suggested she could not make an “official comment” about the indictment, she said, “A lot of times when people come at you with these types of things … it’s evidence that you are doing the work. That is what I’m standing on.”

The indictment in Oklahoma comes just months after Massachusetts-based BLM activist Monica Cannon-Grant pleaded guilty to three counts of wire fraud conspiracy, 10 counts of wire fraud, one count of mail fraud, and two counts each of filing false tax returns and failing to file tax returns.

The race hustler, whose Violence in Boston organization partnered with BLM, duped people into thinking she was helping reduce violence and promoting social awareness, when in fact, she was using their donations to enrich herself. She also defrauded the Boston COVID-19 relief fund, the Boston Office of Housing Stability, and other institutions.

Last year, BLM activist Tyree Conyers-Page of Ohio was convicted of wire fraud and money laundering. Prosecutors indicated that Conyers-Page defrauded donors of more than $450,000 that they collectively gave to his “Black Lives Matter of Greater Atlanta” organization, which he falsely claimed was a nonprofit.

WPDE-TV reported in May 2023 that federal tax filings from 2020 to 2022 revealed only $30 million of the $90 million BLM raised went to other charitable organizations; $22 million went to expenses; $1.6 million went to BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors’ father for security service; and $2.1 million went to BLM board member Shalomyah Bowers for consulting.

While activists sued the organization in the wake of reports that BLM co-founders Cullors, Alicia Garza, and Melina Abdullah treated themselves to a $6 million mansion in Southern California with donation money, their suit was dismissed in June 2023 by a judge who concluded their “complaint fails to sufficiently allege the how, when, where, to whom, and by what means” misrepresentations were tendered.

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

​Black lives matter, Blm, Grifter, Race, Racist, Identitarian, Cullors, Tashella sjheri amore dickerson, Fraud, Wire fraud, Laundering, Embezzlement, Department of justice, Oklahoma, Blm okc, Politics 

The Trump administration is challenging bureaucracy and freeing up the tech industry from burdensome regulations as the AI race speeds on. This week saw Trump’s most recent efforts to keep the United States on the leading edge.

President Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday that will challenge state AI regulations and work toward “a minimally burdensome national standard — not 50 discordant state ones.”

‘You can’t expect a company to get 50 Approvals every time they want to do something.’

“It is the policy of the United States to sustain and enhance the United States’ global AI dominance through a minimally burdensome national policy framework for AI,” the executive order reads.

The executive order commands the creation of the AI Litigation Task Force, “whose sole responsibility shall be to challenge state AI laws inconsistent with the policy set forth in … this order.”

RELATED: ‘America’s next Manifest Destiny’: Department of War unleashes new AI capabilities for military

Photo by ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / AFP via Getty Images

The order provided more reasons for a national standard as well.

For example, it cited a new Colorado law banning “algorithmic discrimination,” which, the order argued, may force AI models to produce false results in order to comply with that stipulation. It also argued that state laws are responsible for much of the ideological bias in AI models and that state laws “sometimes impermissibly regulate beyond state borders, impinging on interstate commerce.”

On Monday, Trump hinted that he would sign an executive order this week that would challenge cumbersome AI regulations at the state level.

Trump said in a Truth Social post on Monday, “There must be only One Rulebook if we are going to continue to lead in AI.”

“We are beating ALL COUNTRIES at this point in the race, but that won’t last long if we are going to have 50 States, many of them bad actors, involved in RULES and the APPROVAL PROCESS,” Trump continued. “THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT ABOUT THIS! AI WILL BE DESTROYED IN ITS INFANCY! I will be doing a ONE RULE Executive Order this week. You can’t expect a company to get 50 Approvals every time they want to do something.”

The order is framed as a provisional measure until Congress is able to establish a national standard to replace the “patchwork of 50 regulatory regimes” that is slowly rising out of the states.

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

​Politics, Tech, Ai, Artificial intelligence, Executive order, Ai revolution, President trump, Trump, Ai litigation task force, Truth social, National standard for ai 

Washington is watching and worrying about a U.S. Supreme Court case that could very well define the future of American self-government. And I don’t say that lightly. At the center of Trump v. Slaughter is a deceptively simple question: Can the president — the one official chosen by the entire nation — remove the administrators and “experts” who wield enormous, unaccountable power inside the executive branch?

This isn’t a technical fight. It’s not a paperwork dispute. It’s a turning point. Because if the answer is no, then the American people no longer control their own government. Elections become ceremonial. The bureaucracy becomes permanent. And the Constitution becomes a suggestion rather than the law of the land.

A government run by experts instead of elected leaders is not a republic. It’s a bureaucracy with a voting booth bolted onto the front to make us feel better.

That simply cannot be. Justice Neil Gorsuch summed it up perfectly during oral arguments on Monday: “There is no such thing in our constitutional order as a fourth branch of government that’s quasi-judicial and quasi-legislative.”

Yet for more than a century, the administrative state has grown like kudzu — quietly, relentlessly, and always in one direction. Today we have a fourth branch of government: unelected, unaccountable, insulated from consequence. Congress hands off lawmaking to agencies. Presidents arrive with agendas, but the bureaucrats remain, and they decide what actually gets done.

If the Supreme Court decides that presidents cannot fire the very people who execute federal power, they are not just rearranging an org chart. The justices are rewriting the structure of the republic. They are confirming what we’ve long feared: Here, the experts rule, not the voters.

A government run by experts instead of elected leaders is not a republic. It’s a bureaucracy with a voting booth bolted onto the front to make us feel better.

The founders warned us

The men who wrote the Constitution saw this temptation coming. Alexander Hamilton and James Madison in the Federalist Papers hammered home the same principle again and again: Power must remain traceable to the people. They understood human nature far too well. They knew that once administrators are protected from accountability, they will accumulate power endlessly. It is what humans do.

That’s why the Constitution vests the executive power in a single president — someone the entire nation elects and can unelect. They did not want a managerial council. They did not want a permanent priesthood of experts. They wanted responsibility and authority to live in one place so the people could reward or replace it.

So this case will answer a simple question: Do the people still govern this country, or does a protected class of bureaucrats now run the show?

Not-so-expert advice

Look around. The experts insisted they could manage the economy — and produced historic debt and inflation.

The experts insisted they could run public health — and left millions of Americans sick, injured, and dead while avoiding accountability.

The experts insisted they could steer foreign policy — and delivered endless conflict with no measurable benefit to our citizens.

And through it all, they stayed. Untouched, unelected, and utterly unapologetic.

If a president cannot fire these people, then you — the voter — have no ability to change the direction of your own government. You can vote for reform, but you will get the same insiders making the same decisions in the same agencies.

That is not self-government. That is inertia disguised as expertise.

A republic no more?

A monarchy can survive a permanent bureaucracy. A dictatorship can survive a permanent bureaucracy. A constitutional republic cannot. Not for long anyway.

We are supposed to live in a system where the people set the course, Congress writes the laws, and the president carries them out. When agencies write their own rules, judges shield them from oversight, and presidents are forbidden from removing them, we no longer live in that system. We live in something else — something the founders warned us about.

And the people become spectators of their own government.

RELATED: Judges break the law to stop Trump from enforcing it

Photo by Jim WATSON / AFP via Getty Images

The path forward

Restoring the separation of powers does not mean rejecting expertise. It means returning expertise to its proper role: advisory, not sovereign.

No expert should hold power that voters cannot revoke. No agency should drift beyond the reach of the executive. No bureaucracy should be allowed to grow branches the Constitution never gave it.

The Supreme Court now faces a choice that will shape American life for a generation. It can reinforce the Constitution, or it can allow the administrative state to wander even farther from democratic control.

This case isn’t about President Trump. It isn’t about Rebecca Slaughter, the former Federal Trade Commission official suing to get her job back. It’s about whether elections still mean anything — whether the American people still hold the reins of their own government.

That is what is at stake: not procedure, not technicalities, but the survival of a system built on the revolutionary idea that the citizens — not the experts — are the ones who rule.

​Opinion & analysis, Trump v. slaughter, Supreme court, Neil gorsuch, Administrative state, Permanent bureaucracy, Donald trump, Rebecca slaughter, Lawsuit, Constitution, Fourth branch, Presidency, Article ii, Experts, Debt, Covid-19 tyranny, Self-government 

Detroit is synonymous with autos, Los Angeles with motion pictures, and Texas with oil. Pittsburgh still conjures steel. When a product or service anchors a region’s economy, that sector has power. Politicians court industry. Industry demands representation and, ideally, protection.

What’s true regionally is just as true nationally. That’s why K Street exists and lobbyists make big bucks. Fortunes rise and fall, but if our GDP slips even 3%, the usual talking heads sprint to the cameras to declare the American economy on the verge of collapse — and always under whichever Republican is in office. When a Democrat presides over a faltering economy, the political media prefers to drive the getaway car.

Harassing users did nothing to stop the poison. Blowing up supply at sea does. Every sunken shipment dents the cartels’ profits. Every explosion represents a tangible loss.

If any of us invented a product that added 3% to national GDP, we’d enjoy the influence over policy and legislation that naturally comes with living in a representative republic with a market economy. Innovation and competition fuel prosperity.

So here’s a question the blue-city, blue-state establishment doesn’t want asked: What percentage of its GDP comes from narcotics trafficking?

Recently a member of our self-styled House of Lords, Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, erupted in outrage over the Pentagon’s lethal targeting of drug traffickers in the Caribbean. He said he was “deeply disturbed” by these operations. Was Reed ever equally disturbed by narcotics deaths in Providence or Pawtucket?

Some Democrats insist the traffickers are “impoverished fishermen.” Reed himself defended them on the grounds that “they are just trying to make money,” as if they weren’t waging chemical warfare on our civilian population. And he reassured us that the men killed weren’t running fentanyl — only cocaine. As though cocaine were some kind of civic improvement!

By any honest analysis, an overnight eradication of drug addiction in America would collapse an entire NGO ecosystem — along with the payrolls of the consultants, therapists, and bureaucrats who perpetually “mitigate” our crises of addiction, alcoholism, and dereliction. Given the nature of addiction, that blessed day will never come.

Look south. By my estimation, two-thirds of Mexico’s economy is directly or indirectly tied to narcotics. No, that’s not the Wall Street Journal’s number; nobody has the real statistics because the books are kept on scraps of paper known in DEA argot as “Pay/Owe” sheets. My estimate comes from observing the level of protection the trade enjoys at every tier of Mexican governance — local, rural, national. Narcotics are so economically essential that cartels decide who can run in elections with preordained outcomes. Their influence rivals that of the Democratic Party’s super delegates, if you’ll pardon the comparison.

Big Narco commands private armies, armored vehicles, anti-tank missiles, machine guns, uniforms, rules, and courts. The narcotics sector has effectively stalled Mexico’s political maturation.

And it’s affecting us too.

RELATED: Trump cracks the Caracas cartel code

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

In past administrations, the so-called war on drugs looked more like a war on addicts and their families, with only token strikes on the international criminal organizations moving the product. The Trump administration has reversed that. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth is hitting the cartels directly. Harassing users did nothing to stop the poison. Blowing up supply at sea does. Every sunken shipment dents the cartels’ profits. Every explosion represents a tangible loss.

The hysterics from Jack Reed and others suggest these interdictions are hurting the economies of blue cities and states more than they care to admit. You’d think the destruction of cocaine, heroin, and fentanyl — inflicting daily carnage — would spark celebration. In Los Angeles County alone, the coroner processes six dead Americans per day from overdoses. Last year, it was eight. Fathers, mothers, runaway teens, derelict addicts — Americans, dead every day.

And yet Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) — raw with presidential ambition — insists the leading cause of death for young Californians is firearms. This is false of course. But to blue-city politicians, gun control makes for better PR than confronting thousands of overdose deaths. Meanwhile Sacramento’s ruling cabal has passed a thicket of laws, regulations, and policies that effectively protect narcotics trafficking in the Golden State.

Guns hardly register in California’s GDP. Big Narco does.

​Mexico, Cartels, Democrats, Opinion & analysis, Jack reed, Venezuela, Cocaine, Fentanyl, Drug cartels, Drug trafficking, War on drugs, Donald trump, Pete hegseth 

Christmas is fast approaching, and what better way to get into the spirit of the season than with some fine American spirits? From single malts to bourbons, American distilleries have a surprisingly vast selection to choose from. And as you will see, their products are something to be proud of!

Take a look at some of our favorite pours from across the country during this Christmas season.

Single malts

We start our Tour de American Single Malt with a pour that could fool even the most trained tasters into thinking they were on the banks of the River Spey. The Courage and Conviction line from Virginia Distillery Co. is one of the most Scotch-like American single malts I have ever tasted. And for any fan of sherry-forward Scotch, Courage and Conviction Sherry Aged is a must-try. On the nose is a fragrant, buttery, red fruity sweetness that Macallan lovers will recognize, with plenty of vanilla and just a hint of green apple peel. The taste mirrors the nose, especially that butteriness, with a bit more emphasis on spice and toasted hazelnuts. The finish elongates those sherry notes even more, toward the direction of Oloroso: dried red fruits, toffee, and caramel.

All in all, Virginians should be more than proud of what’s coming out of their state! But I’m a little biased toward our next stop: Texas.

Perhaps no state in the craft whiskey scene is more controversial. The hot Texas climate scorches whiskey as it ages, and you either love it or hate it. I, for one, love it. The oak overdose can be quite a hassle in the world of new barrel-aged bourbon, but American single malt has the option to play outside those rules.

Enter one of the original Texas distilleries and the biggest player in Texas single malt: Balcones. Its Lineage expression embraces both new and previously used barrels, resulting in a fruit bomb that’s still blooming with Texas character. Fig jam, vanilla custard, and grapefruit pith greet you on the nose. Honey, raw fig, peach, and more of that grapefruit dance on the tongue. The finish lingers with classic Texas charred oak, burnt sugar, and a fruitiness that awakens when you breathe it all in. Lineage was the whisky (there’s that missing “e” again) that first made me fall in love with Balcones. And at only about $35 a bottle, it’s hard to beat!

Traveling south in the same state, we arrive in the Texas Hill Country, a wild land of limestone cliffs, cedar groves, and rolling bluebonnet pastures. To me, it’s home — rattlesnake-riddled, sun-scorched home. It’s serene, with an attitude, and so is its single malt. About an hour north of San Antonio, we find Andalusia Whiskey Company and its Irish-peated expression, Revenant Oak. The serenity: German chocolate cake, rich vanilla, and savory butterscotch. The attitude: smoked brisket with just enough sweet, peppery barbecue sauce to remind us that we’re in Texas. Put simply, it’s cake at a barbecue joint: an unexpected, yet oddly satisfying pairing that’s about as mouthwatering as it gets.

But unlike Scotch, American single malt doesn’t always use peat to add smoke. Peat bogs are everywhere in Scotland — it was the fuel the Scots had on hand to dry their barley. Here in America, if you want to start a fire, you use wood. At Santa Fe Spirits in New Mexico, they chose locally abundant mesquite. Aged in the high desert at 7,000 feet above sea level, the company’s Original Mesquite expression of Original Santa Fe Whiskey is a prime example of forging your own traditions. This whiskey smells nothing of peat, but more like tangy barbecue sauce dripping into a mesquite campfire. This carries over to the taste, which also dances with caramel, bright spice, and zingy green apple (it did start out as an apple orchard, after all).

Santa Fe Spirits

Next, we leave Texas, heading back north and up into the Rockies to visit a pioneer in American single malt that has been making possibly the most quintessential pour of the category since 2004: Stranahan’s Colorado Whiskey. Soft on the nose, Stranahan’s Original has chocolate, butterscotch, and a floral graininess, like the crisp warmth of an early mountain spring. The taste brings the ripe fruits of summer, which is short, albeit sweet, up in the mountains. So fall sets in quick: honey, fresh grain, and that chocolate again. Stranahan’s Original finishes just shy of winter, since Coloradans, I can imagine, get enough of that already. Why not enjoy the other seasons?

Stranahan’s

Or even other regions entirely. Lately, Stranahan’s has been experimenting with finishing American single malt in barrels from across the world: Irish whiskey, tequila, and, most recently, rum. These unique whiskies are released as the company’s Diamond Peak series, one experiment at a time. The third annual release was finished in Caribbean rum casks and provides a familiar yet surprising take on Stranahan’s single malt. Sweet notes of vanilla are amplified in the aroma, turning into banana Runts candy. Sweet toffee and tropical fruits arrive with a sip, along with a silky mouthfeel that evolves into coconut candy, earthy malt, and the classic Stranahan’s chocolate on the finish. At around $80 a bottle, it’s a pour to savor, and it delivers!

On the final stop of this tour, we head to the Pacific Northwest, which has become a hotbed for American single malt, in large part thanks to Seattle’s Westland Distillery. Westland’s base offering is a prime example of its unique flavor profile, which takes the chocolate note of many American single malts and boosts it up, adding a roasted nuttiness to the finish. It’s a good place to start. But if you fall in love with Westland, might I recommend something special?

Westland Garryana is a night among the pines in the northern forests. At once desserty and dark, but sparkling, like a warm cup of hot chocolate under a starry sky. “Garryana” refers to the native species of oak that the whiskey is partially aged in. As for the rest of the aging process, it varies by batch. I’ve been enjoying Edition 6, which mixes Garryana barrels with first- and second-fill sherry and brandy barrels — both of which come across in spades. The sherry sweetness is prominent at the beginning of the sip, while a cognac-like effervescence appears midway. It clocks in at 50% ABV with a premium price tag of around $150. So savor it respectfully, preferably with friends around a late fall campfire.

Royal Lochnagar’s 12-year-old Highland Single Malt Scotch Whiskey is the liquid version of an old private members’ club with tobacco-stained ceilings, high-backed green leather chairs, and a curious collection of artifacts left over from past members, all alluding to greatness while forever remaining in the backdrop. For better or worse, this dry and rounded house affords no member an opportunity to disturb or overpower the others — except sometimes an uppity vanilla. Instead, it seamlessly balances citrus on the nose, lightly spiced toffee on the tongue, and old wood on further reflection. Best served amid a spirited backroom debate over that which appears to most matter — or, alternatively, in silent solitude, awestruck by the conclusion.

Bourbon

Angel’s Envy is the Wilf Carter of bourbons. Carter, known south of the 49th parallel as Montana Slim, was a minister’s kid — one of nine — who rode the rails west, trampled mountain trails, and cow-punched until it came time to sing pioneer tunes to settled folk, on at least one occasion doing so while dangling from a telephone pole. Carter is disarming at first, with his smooth, cherry-sweet voice and inoffensive themes, and can sometimes come across as nutty. There is, however, darkness beneath the surface (oak, raisins) and a mild burn that lingers long after the yodeling cowboy appears to be finished. The Louisville Distilling Co.’s Kentucky bourbon, which does a six-month stint in port barrels before bottling, fetches roughly $40 and is best served when “it’s twilight over Texas.”

Heaven Hill Distillery’s Rittenhouse is a campfire, one full tank away from civilization and on the starry side of nowhere. This fire will heat your body without burning it, throwing off whiffs of cinnamon, nicely turned s’mores, and nuts previously shelled over the coals. A campfire is always a finale — bringing the night, week, or hunting season to a crackling close. At 50% ABV, you’re best off kicking back with this 100 proof straight rye until the last ember loses its glow and sleep takes you. Heaven Hill’s $55 standout is best served with your phone, boots, and holster off.

Should you want just a little more sizzle in your rye, Heaven Hill has one more trick up its sleeve. Clocking in at a lusty 55% ABV, Pikesville is one of the smoothest 110-proof drams you’ll encounter — without sacrificing any fire, of course. Born in Maryland, a pre-Prohibition hot spot, Pikesville eventually put down roots in Kentucky, where Heaven Hill maintains the brand’s venerable 1890s approach to distilling and aging. Yes, each bottle of Pikesville is at least six years old, part of the secret to its success on the tasting competition circuit. It’s as advertised on the palate — a country bakery melange of vanilla, honey, spice, and smoke. Not to be missed.

Bulleit Bourbon Frontier Whiskey is the truck that never lets you down. There may have been others you fancied in your youth — perhaps even a foreign make — but in a world full of pretenders, it’s hard to go wrong with a tried and proven, no-pretense American classic. Bulleit is strong but handles smoothly, feels good, and gets you to where you need to go. You might smell gas on first open, but cooked mash will quickly take over as you settle into your old groove. Smoke — not the kind you’ll need to see a mechanic about — lightly accents mild malt, maple, and dried fruit tastes, while never overcomplicating things. The Bulleit Distiller’s titular star is an amber staple too good to let collect dust, which usually goes for around $25. Best served at a poker table in a sunbaked saloon where everything appears to be melting but your composure.

Heaven Hill’s Elijah Craig Small Batch straight bourbon is a chestnut fiddle and a well-rosined bow: not for every occasion, but more than welcome at a strathspey, a wedding feast, or a wake. There’s a touch of cherried chocolate, caramel, and vanilla sweetness that ensure no single note is flat and an oaky finish to round out any renegade sharps. Too much fiddle will have you hating catgut and horsehair, even if fine-tuned by Heaven Hill. However, for $30, this non-age-stated bourbon will play you a pleasant jig whenever the time is right.

Rabbit Hole’s Cavehill Four Grain Triple Malt bourbon is a paperback thriller. There’s plenty of interest going on, and it’s great on vacation. The “but” looms only for those seasoned bourbon drinkers keen on finding a life-changing book — or, perhaps, getting around to finally finishing “The Brothers Karamazov.” Cavehill starts off with a lovely bouquet: apples and berries. Authors such as the late Tom Clancy who do thrillers well engage readers as soon as possible. Cavehill certainly does so, providing intrigue in the first pages with tastes of pepper, toasted grain, and spiced oak, all dripping with honey. One of the antagonists — raw alcohol — also rears his head early in the book. While ostensibly dispatched within short order, this antagonist makes a short-lived appearance toward the very end. With his defeat, however, there is a nice custard finish. This $60, 95-proof whiskey is best served between great reads.

Sometimes, a pour transports you before you even realize it. With this whiskey, I was back on Christmas Eve, huddled around the campfire of a family I had just met, relaxing with mutual friends who taught me that the only thing better than a s’more is a s’more with a Reese’s cup in the middle. Fox & Oden Double Oaked bourbon doesn’t exactly smell like a s’more or a campfire, but that’s the magic of good whiskey: It always takes you back to the community. There are definite notes of deep chocolate, smooth cinnamon, and a slightly toasted marshmallow on the nose. But also, caramel apple, molasses, and an effervescence reminiscent of a well-aged cognac. And on the taste, flavors of melted chocolate, that smooth cinnamon again, and oak meld in unison with a sensation: the warmth of a fire, itself like a warm, familiar embrace on a cold Christmas Eve. It’s 99 proof and sells for around $99.

Bourbon is the nation’s signature spirit, and like any industrious American on the rise, you want a selection that will impress clients and friends alike. You’ve moved beyond Fireball and rum with Coke and are ready to enjoy a more refined experience. The good news is that after decades of chasing fads in foreign spirits like vodka and gin, Americans have returned home to their native drink, sparking a bourbon boom. As a result, bourbon enthusiasts now have more distillers and unique expressions than ever before, but prices and scarcity have also soared along with demand.

So here are some options to help you build a respectable bar without draining your wallet.

The Heaven Hill Distillery recently released its Old Fitzgerald seven-year bottled-in-bond bourbon, and it has been making quite a splash. This elegant bottle comes in at around $60 and looks great on a shelf, but more importantly, the whiskey inside is excellent. The 100 proof is enough to bring a concentrated flavor and smooth texture without scaring off beginners. The wheated mash bill also helps create a soft finish, making it perfect for those trying whiskey neat for the first time. With notes of vanilla, honey, and butterscotch paired with a subtle oak, Old Fitzgerald is a crowd favorite, ideal for starting the night and opening up your palate.

When most people think of bourbon, they usually aren’t considering Indiana, but the Midwest has produced some excellent distilleries, and one of the standouts is Hard Truth. The entire lineup is superb and generally runs between $50 and $60. You can’t go wrong with any of Hard Truth’s options, but the standout for me is the four-grain bourbon. This 100-proof offering is a butterscotch bomb with plenty of sweetness and a pleasant medium finish. It’s another great choice to warm up the taste buds or to pass across the bar to someone used to beer or cocktails.

Old Forester is a classic brand with a wide range of great options, including its 1910 double-barreled bourbon. Don’t let the 93 proof fool you; this bottle is packed with flavor and highly approachable for under $60. The whiskey is aged like a typical bourbon but finished in a second, heavily charred barrel, which adds subtle hints of chocolate, marshmallow, coffee, and dark oak. The 1910 is also a fantastic choice for elevating coffee-based cocktails like the Revolver.

Our first higher-proof whiskey on the list is the 1910’s bigger brother from Old Forester, the 1920 Prohibition. At 115 proof, this is a slightly more challenging release that will reward you with rich notes of cherry, molasses, and bananas Foster. At around $55, the 1920 is consistently ranked as one of the best values in bourbon for good reasons and can serve as a gateway to more complex whiskeys.

Wild Turkey might be the quintessential Kentucky bourbon, but it offers much more than the basic 101 you’re probably familiar with from college. The company’s lineup includes many excellent options, but Rare Breed strikes the perfect balance between value and complexity. Often available for under $50, this 116.8-proof bourbon features a blend of 6-, 8-, and 12-year-old whiskeys that deliver bold flavors. Notes of cinnamon, baking spices, orange peel, and a touch of nuttiness lead to a long finish, and it holds up well to a block of ice for those who prefer a chilled drink.

Something strange happens when you age whiskey in the intense heat of Texas, imparting a particular flavor that is sometimes called the “Texas funk.” The intense temperature creates a rapid aging process, which allows Still Austin to put out 2-year-old whiskey that tastes far more complex than it has any right to. The company’s $60 cask strength expression comes in at 116 proof and reveals notes of deep brown sugar, cherries, and pastry crust, finishing with a bold rye-spice kick. Texas whiskey isn’t for everyone, but if it suits your taste, Still Austin will keep you coming back.

Jack Daniel’s has expanded its range over the past few years, including its excellent line of single-barrel, barrel-proof expressions. Old Number Seven is a fine entry-level bottle, but something special happens to Jack Daniel’s as it reaches higher proofs. Single barrels can vary in flavor and strength, but with proofs in the 120s and 130s, this whiskey isn’t for the faint of heart. Dark, rich note of molasses and banana blend with a flavor reminiscent of drinking a cola, but no one will judge you for cooling this monster down with a block of ice. Many local retailers partner with Jack Daniel’s to select exceptional barrels for their stores. If you can find a store pick, I highly recommend it. For those interested in exploring America’s other native whiskey, the rye, Jack also offers an excellent single-barrel, barrel-proof expression that contains enough corn to taste more like bourbon — a great way to start without jumping straight into the deep end.

James E. Pepper Barrel Proof is yet another relatively new release gaining wider distribution. Its decanter bottle features a stunning retro design that stands out in any collection and instantly adds a touch of class. The 106.6 proof can be deceiving, as this whiskey offers a bold and spicy black pepper flavor that dances across the palate. Notes of almond, oak, and dark fruit give way to vanilla and baking spices, with the pepper remaining prominent through the finish. This is a wonderfully complex bourbon that has steadily gained a dedicated following, thanks to its exceptional value at a $65 price point. Few bottles under $100 combine this aesthetic appeal and rich flavor, so if this whiskey has reached your local market, I highly recommend picking it up.

You may have noticed that one of America’s most popular distilleries has been absent from this list: Buffalo Trace. The Buffalo Trace lineup includes some of the most sought-after bourbons in the country at reasonable prices; however, they are often difficult to find. If you’re in an area where you can regularly walk into a store and find Blanton’s, Eagle Rare, E.H. Taylor, and Weller on the shelf, consider yourself lucky. These whiskeys are highly desired, for good reason, and typically retail for $40 to $60, but patience is key — avoid paying marked-up prices.

Remember, exploring bourbon is a journey, and there are many great, affordable options available. Happy hunting.

​Align, Whiskey, Single malt, Christmas, Christmas shopping, Dad, Mom, Family, America, Made in america, American spirit 

After Nick Fuentes catapulted into the spotlight following his appearance on “The Tucker Carlson Show,” Americans faced an unwelcome reckoning: Who is this person, what are “Groypers,” and is he really so revered by young boys and men?

The media frenzy produced predictable reactions. Republicans insisted he doesn’t represent them. Democrats blamed Donald Trump and “fascism.” Reporters rushed to diagnose “extremism” in young men. Everyone condemned the boys who followed him. Almost no one asked what made those boys susceptible to Fuentes’ content in the first place.

In today’s school culture, behaving and learning like a boy are treated as failure.

We labeled these boys racist, anti-Semitic, and homophobic without ever considering how we got here. It is easier to scold than to understand. But when it comes to Gen Z and social media-saturated boys, we default to quick, reductive narratives that ignore the larger picture.

Here is the real crux of the issue: If you ignore boys’ needs in school, the red-pill internet is more than happy to fill that void.

One father of an 11-year-old boy went viral after describing what he saw at his son’s elementary school band orientation night. “I despise the Groyper movement,” he wrote, “… [but] as the night went on it became obvious to me why young men rage against the larger social system.”

He described classrooms covered in DEI messaging, trans Pride flags, and “basically ever[y] sort of race and gender social justice messaging you can imagine.” He also noted the political commentary from teachers and the strict behavioral expectations placed on boys throughout the school day.

He shared two points that reflect what millions of boys experience today: “The boys are treated almost as though they are defective girls,” he wrote. His son even came home excited because he had seen a male teacher at school.

That is the reality for boys across the country. Thousands of families report a growing feminization of schools that leaves boys bored and disengaged. As author Richard Reeves put it on “On Point,” many parents feel their sons are square pegs being forced into round holes.

Boys just aren’t engaged. I wonder why?

But it isn’t just boys. The ongoing assault on male teachers — and their resulting exodus from the school system — leaves boys without anyone to look up to.

Scott Yenor captured what is happening in a recent article for the Federalist. “Today’s schools emphasize belonging and nurturing at the expense of objective standards,” he wrote. Turning in work on time is no longer imperative; loose grading is expected; schools are now run by inclusivity and “gentle parenting.”

Yenor ends with a pointed observation: “Men should be given enough credit to know where they are not wanted.”

With schools shifting ideologically and male teachers disappearing, boys lose crucial role models. Research shows male teachers — especially in elementary and middle school — boost test scores, engagement, and behavior. Young boys, particularly those from unstable backgrounds, rely on male teachers for support they cannot get elsewhere.

The effects on boys who are “treated like malfunctioning girls” go far beyond academics. Boys are falling behind both emotionally and developmentally. They read at lower levels, enter kindergarten less prepared, and take on fewer leadership roles.

In today’s school culture, behaving and learning like a boy are treated as failure.

RELATED: America’s new lost generation is looking for home — and finding the wrong ones

Olga Yastremska via iStock/Getty Images

So the internet, in all its damaged glory, fills the void. As Rolling Stone’s Eli Thompson observed, Fuentes’ content once popped up on Instagram occasionally, but now his voice is everywhere for teenage boys.

“But even when he makes comments they see as fringe, it boosts his popularity because he’s edgy and willing to say whatever comes to his mind,” Thompson noted. “That has become his perfect recipe to get young male fans.”

Thompson identifies a hard truth: It is not the extremist content that hooks them. Boys don’t necessarily identify with what is being said. They identify with being identified.

Does Nick Fuentes promote views we wouldn’t want spreading in a democratic society? Certainly. Is he anti-Semitic, racist, and everything we don’t want boys absorbing? Yes. Boys do need better media literacy so that they aren’t enthralled by money-driven influencers like him.

But none of that changes the basic reality: In times of isolation, boys look for connection.

What can schools do to keep boys from turning to Nick Fuentes? Stop ignoring them. Bring back male teachers. Use instructional methods that recognize the strengths of both boys and girls. Pair boys with strong adult male mentors who teach them to channel their strengths, not suppress them. And when inviting guest speakers, bring in men who model discipline, purpose, and genuine success.

Boys aren’t broken. They’re ignored. Fix that, and the red-pill internet — and Nick Fuentes — lose their grip.

​Opinion & analysis, Nick fuentes, Boys, Crisis, Internet, Radicalization, Anti-semitism, Racism, Schools, Gender gap, Education 

A shoplifter who returned to a Wisconsin Walmart to steal more items on Saturday made an “astonishing display of bad timing,” according to police.

The Hartford Police Department said it was in the middle of a charity event involving many police when one of them noticed the alleged shoplifter among them.

‘Santa definitely made a note in the Naughty List ledger.’

“Unfortunately for her, she walked straight into Walmart during the one time of year when the store is basically a satellite police station,” reads a Facebook post from the department.

Police said they weren’t alerted to her presence but were able to identify her as 24-year-old Sophia Malak and quickly arrested her.

Prosecutors said she stole about $600 worth of merchandise from the Walmart three days prior to returning on that fateful Saturday.

Malak initially told police she was only shopping for her children but later allegedly admitted that she was planning to steal again from the store before seeing the police and changing her plans.

Police said they found $900 worth of stolen toys in the woman’s car.

She was charged with felony theft.

Police said another large theft was prevented, police barely had to pause the event, and “Santa definitely made a note in the Naughty List ledger.”

They had a tongue-in-cheek tip for other wannabe shoplifters.

“If you’re planning felony retail theft… maybe avoid the day when the building is basically 30% law enforcement and 70% wrapping paper,” police wrote.

RELATED: Judge sides with grocery store employee who was fired for thwarting shoplifter in California: ‘The dumbest cruelest incident’

Despite the bizarre arrest, the police department said the event was successful.

“Walmart provided the space, and Wellspring Church volunteers wrapped the gifts the kids picked out for their families while shopping with the officers,” the department wrote.

“The Hartford Police Cadets were also on hand to assist where needed,” it continued. “In addition to the families signed up to participate, six random children who came in shopping that day were selected to get a free bicycle and helmet.”

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

​Shoplifter arrested, Sophia malak, Shoplifter surrounded by cops, Hartford police department, Crime 

A CDC advisory panel has opted to end the recommendation that all babies in the United States get a hepatitis B vaccine immediately after birth — and the change has BlazeTV host Liz Wheeler recalling her treatment at the hospital when she denied the vaccine for her newborn.

“I will never, ever forget on the day of my oldest daughter’s birth. I’m in the hospital room. I declined the hepatitis B vaccine for her, and … after I declined the vaccine, they send a perinatologist into my room,” she says.

A perinatologist, Wheeler explains, is “an ob-gyn with two or three additional years of training for high-risk pregnancies.”

“They send a perinatologist to my room that tells me how important it is for me to give my daughter this vaccine. And I say to her, ‘Why? I don’t have hep B.’ And this doctors hems and haws and hems and haws,” she says.

“And finally she says to me, ‘Well, when you drive home from the hospital tomorrow after you’re discharged, you might get in a car accident on your drive home, and your newborn baby might need a blood transfusion, and that blood might be contaminated with hepatitis B,’” she continues.

“I kid you not. Word for word what this perinatologist says to me on the day of my daughter’s birth,” she adds.

Wheeler did not listen to the “expert,” but instead remembers what she said as a “ridiculous, manipulative, unscientific” ploy to coerce her into vaccinating her newborn baby.

“It does, of course, show that the so-called experts and the so-called science are corrupted. They are, as they have been for a long time, they are bought and paid for by Big Pharma, who seeks to profiteer by exploiting your vulnerable children and you in moments of vulnerability,” Wheeler says.

However, she doesn’t see the change as a major win for those skeptical of the vaccine.

“They actually did not do away with it. They’re simply recommending that it be delayed by two months. So, instead of a 1-day-old baby getting this vaccine, they’re now recommending that parents make this decision at the two-month mark for their baby,” she explains, pointing out how ridiculous this still is.

“They’re not engaging in promiscuous sexual activity with prostitutes or using intravenous drugs,” she says, adding, “which is how hepatitis B is passed.”

Want more from Liz Wheeler?

To enjoy more of Liz’s based commentary, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Video, Video phone, Upload, Free, Camera phone, Sharing, Youtube.com, The liz wheeler show, Liz wheeler, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Hep b vaccination, Hepatitis b, Cdc advisory, Robert malone, Anti vaccine, Medical freedom, Vaccination, Vaccine propaganda 

Democratic Socialist Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) warned recently in the London Guardian that artificial intelligence “is getting far too little discussion in Congress, the media, and within the general population” despite the speed at which it is developing. “That has got to change.”

To my surprise, as a conservative advocate of limited government and free markets, I agree completely.

AI is neither a left nor a right issue. It is a human issue that will decide who holds power in the decades ahead and whether individuals retain sovereignty.

As I read Sanders’ piece, I kept thinking, “This sounds like something I could have written!” That alone should tell us something. If two people who disagree on almost everything else see the same dangers emerging from artificial intelligence, then maybe we can set aside the usual partisan divides and confront a problem that will touch every American.

Different policies, same fears

I’ve worked in the policy world for more than a decade, and it’s fair to say Bernie Sanders and I have opposed each other in nearly every major fight. I’ve pushed back against his single-payer health care plans. I’ve worked to stop his Green New Deal agenda. On economic policy, Sanders has long stood for the exact opposite of the free-market principles I believe make prosperity possible.

That’s why reading his AI op-ed felt almost jarring. Time after time, his concerns mirrored my own.

Sanders warned about the unprecedented power Silicon Valley elites now wield over this transformational technology. As someone who spent years battling Big Tech censorship, I share his alarm over unaccountable tech oligarchs shaping information, culture, and political discourse.

He points to forecasts showing AI-driven automation could displace nearly 100 million American jobs in the coming decade. I helped Glenn Beck write “Dark Future: Uncovering the Great Reset’s Terrifying Next Phase” in 2023, where we raised the exact same red flag, that rapid automation could destabilize the workforce faster than society can adapt.

Sanders highlights how AI threatens privacy, civil liberties, and personal autonomy. These are concerns I write and speak about constantly. Sanders notes that AI isn’t just changing industry; it’s reshaping the human condition, foreign policy, and even the structure of democratic life. On all of this, he is correct.

When a Democratic Socialist and a free-market conservative diagnose the same disease, it usually means the symptoms are too obvious to ignore.

Where we might differ

While Sanders and I share almost identical fears about AI, I suspect we would quickly diverge on the solutions. In his op-ed, he offers no real policy prescriptions at all. Instead, he simply says, “Congress must act now.” Act how? Sanders never says. And to be fair, that ambiguity is a dilemma I recognize.

As someone who argues consistently for limited government, I’m reluctant to call for new regulations. History shows that sweeping, top-down interventions usually create more problems than they solve. Yet AI poses a challenge unlike anything we’ve seen before — one that neither the market nor Congress can responsibly ignore.

RELATED: Shock poll: America’s youth want socialism on autopilot — literally

Photo by Cesc Maymo/Getty Images

When Sanders says, “Congress must act,” does he want sweeping, heavy-handed regulations that freeze innovation? Does he envision embedding ESG-style subjective metrics into AI systems, politicizing them further? Does he want to codify conformity to European Union AI regulations?

We cannot allow a handful of corporations or governments to embed their subjective values into systems that increasingly manipulate our decisions, influence our communications, and deter our autonomy.

The nonnegotiables

Instead of vague calls for Congress to “do something,” we need a clear framework rooted in enduring American principles.

AI systems (especially those deployed across major sectors) must be built with hard, nonnegotiable safeguards that protect the individual from both corporate and governmental overreach.

This means embedding constitutional values into AI design, enshrining guarantees for free speech, due process, privacy, and equal treatment. It means ensuring transparency around how these systems operate and what data they collect.

This also means preventing ideological influence, whether from Beijing, Silicon Valley, or Washington, D.C., by insisting on objectivity, neutrality, and accountability.

These principles should not be considered partisan. They are the guardrails, rooted in the Constitution, which protect us from any institution, public or private, that seeks too much power.

And that is why the overlap between Sanders’ concerns and mine matters so much. AI is neither a left nor a right issue. It is a human issue that will decide who holds power in the decades ahead and whether individuals retain sovereignty.

If Bernie Sanders and I both see the same storm gathering on the horizon, perhaps it’s time the rest of the country looks up and recognizes the clouds for what they are.

Now is the moment for Americans, across parties and philosophies, to insist that AI strengthen liberty rather than erode it. If we fail to set those boundaries today, we may soon find that the most important choices about our future are no longer made by people at all.

​Opinion & analysis, Bernie sanders, Artificial intelligence, Ai regulations, Freedom of speech, Big tech censorship, Congress, Free markets, Dark future book, Great reset, Due process, Neutrality, Privacy, China, Silicon valley, Choice 

Authorities allege that a Texas mother turned a blind eye to her boyfriend beating her 3-year-old son over a sustained period. Now the boy is dead — and his mother as well as her boyfriend are charged with capital murder.

An arrest warrant states that Christopher Alexander — the boyfriend of Chelsea Berg — brought 3-year-old Dawson Zamora to Medical City McKinney on Oct. 14, KFDA-TV reported.

‘Chelsea knew that Dawson was demonstrating signs of severe illness and physical deterioration, yet neglected to remove Dawson from the dangerous situation and failed to obtain appropriate care for his injuries.’

Medical staff determined the child was covered in “apparent physical injuries in various stages of healing” and immediately became concerned about intentional trauma or abuse, the station said.

Witnesses then observed Alexander speaking in an agitated manner on the phone with Berg, who is Dawson’s mother, KFDA reported.

Witnesses added that they could hear Berg making accusatory statements toward Alexander and Alexander saying he “had to get rough with the child and strike the child in the stomach while trying to wake him up,” the station said.

RELATED: Female accused of stabbing her newborn baby to death: ‘I have never seen anything this gruesome’

Documents indicate that Berg told detectives her son previously had been hospitalized for normal illnesses but added that she recently noticed bruising on his body, KFDA reported.

More from the station:

She indicated she thought the child’s day care was responsible for the injuries. She also indicated that she trusted Alexander to watch Dawson and made statements to indicate she had “never seen anything alarming concerning Christopher and her children.”

Documents state detectives showed Berg photographs of Dawson taken during the current incident, which included severe physical injuries throughout his head, chest, abdomen, back, and all extremities. Berg denied having seen most of the current injuries and was shocked by the severity of the injuries.

Documents indicate that Berg didn’t suggest that Alexander was responsible for the abuse, KFDA said.

Soon Dawson was taken to Children’s Medical Center Dallas, where medical staff determined that the child’s injuries likely would result in death or permanent disabilities, the station said.

Detectives then got a search warrant for the apartment of Berg, Alexander, and Dawson, KFDA reported.

RELATED: Mom says white man kidnapped her 3-year-old daughter — then admits the gruesome truth

Documents also note that investigators collected evidence in the apartment suggesting someone may have been hurt — and there may have been an attempt to clean or conceal blood or other trace evidence, the station said.

What’s more, through search warrants detectives downloaded data from multiple cell phones and electronic devices — and documents say detectives found evidence illustrating that Dawson suffered numerous injuries over the past months while alone with Alexander, KFDA reported.

Police added to the station that the evidence “clearly indicated that Chelsea observed the injuries on her child, knew that her child was continuously getting hurt with Christopher, and clearly knew the dangers that Christopher presented to her children.”

In addition, documents added that “Chelsea knew that Dawson was demonstrating signs of severe illness and physical deterioration, yet neglected to remove Dawson from the dangerous situation and failed to obtain appropriate care for his injuries,” KFDA reported.

Dawson died Sunday of his injuries, the station said.

KFDA, citing the arrest warrant, states that evidence indicates Alexander had been physically assaulting the boy over a period of at least 30 days — and that both Berg and Alexander noticed his visible injuries.

Police added to the station that evidence also suggests the couple feared Child Protective Services would investigate them if they sought medical treatment for Dawson. In addition, KFDA noted that the couple “deliberately omitted pertinent information about the cause of the child’s injuries” at one point, according to documents.

Berg was arrested Monday — the day after her son’s death — and charged with capital murder, the station said, adding that Alexander’s charges were upgraded to capital murder.

KFDA noted that a Texas capital murder conviction is punishable by death or life in prison.

Berg and Alexander were first arrested in October and charged with injury to a child, a first-degree felony, KTVT-TV reported, adding that Alexander also was charged with tampering with evidence.

Berg had been out of jail on bond until she was arrested again Monday, KTVT said, adding that Alexander remained in the Collin County Jail.

Dawson’s father, Dahrian Zamora, confirmed his son’s death Sunday in a social media post, KTVT said, adding that Dahrian’s birthday also was on Sunday.

“His gift to me was his final breath, and we are now forever interlocked with my birth and his death,” Dahrian Zamora wrote on Facebook, KTVT added. “He held on to spend one last birthday with me and refused to go until then.”

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

​Physical abuse, Beating, Child dead, Mother, Boyfriend, Capital murder charges, Texas, Arrests, Jailed, 3-year-old son, Crime 

A federal grand jury refused to indict Letitia James on mortgage charges after the Dept. of Justice refiled the case against the New York attorney general.

James had been accused of making false statements on mortgage documents in order to obtain favorable financial terms and had the charges dismissed from a different grand jury.

‘Everyone is trying to MAKE NEW YORK GREAT AGAIN, and it can never be done with this wacky crook in office.’

Prosecutors said James claimed a home purchased in 2020 to be a second home instead of an investment property, which would have allowed her to save about $19,000 in interest payments. She has denied all wrongdoing.

The prior charges were dismissed on the basis that the administration had unlawfully appointed the U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia.

“This unprecedented rejection makes even clearer that this case should never have seen the light of day,” said Abbe Lowell, an attorney representing James.

“Career prosecutors who knew better refused to bring it, and now two different grand juries in two different cities have refused to allow these baseless charges to be brought,” he added. “Any further attempt to revive these discredited charges would be a mockery of our system of justice.

President Donald Trump has called for James to resign over the allegations.

“Letitia James, a totally corrupt politician, should resign from her position as New York State Attorney General, IMMEDIATELY,” he wrote on social media. “Everyone is trying to MAKE NEW YORK GREAT AGAIN, and it can never be done with this wacky crook in office.”

RELATED: Letitia James gives unhinged rant after court hearing for bank fraud allegations

James successfully convicted the president of lying about the values of his real estate holdings in order to secure favorable bank terms. He was ordered to pay nearly half a billion dollars in the civil fraud judgment, but the fine was struck down by a New York state appeals court in August.

The attorney general’s office signaled that it intended to file an appeal in the case.

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

​Ny attorney general letitia james, Mortgage fraud, Grand jury declines indictment, Letitia james vs trump, Politics 

The left is yet again up in arms about a non-issue, this time regarding the amount of trillionaires in America. Because what they don’t appear to know is that there are no trillionaires in America.

“We did it. They’ve been eradicated. There are no American trillionaires. We did it everybody. Yay. I guess that’s a goal we all have now. In case you didn’t know,” BlazeTV host Stu Burguiere says on “Stu Does America.” “A lot of people on the left apparently don’t.”

And sadly, the New York Times has landed on the list of those who don’t know this, as a recent article is titled, “Musk Wins $1 Trillion Pay Package, Creating Split Screen on Wealth in America.”

“Again, no it doesn’t,” Burguiere comments.

“At Tesla, based in the Austin, Texas, area, shareholders have largely bought into a winner-takes-all version of capitalism, agreeing by a wide margin to give Mr. Musk shares worth almost a trillion dollars if the company under his management achieves ambitious financial and operational goals over the next decade,” the article reads.

“Now, the terms I would like you to look at in that particular quote are ‘shareholders.’ So, the people whose money is going to be paid to Elon Musk have bought in. So, why would they buy into a winner-takes-all philosophy of capitalism? Because that would bankrupt them, right?” Burguiere asks.

“Elon wins, they get nothing, right? Let’s think about it a little bit. Could it possibly be that they actually win too? Could it possibly be that they think that if Elon Musk becomes a trillionaire, they’re doing pretty darn well for themselves as well? Could it possibly be that the New York freaking Times, located in the financial capital of the world, have no idea what they’re talking about?” he continues.

“And you might say, ‘Well, yeah, that is what it means, Stu.’ No, it doesn’t. It means they’re lying. They know exactly what’s going on here. They know why they’re framing it this way. And they’re doing it completely intentionally,” he adds.

The article goes on to discuss mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani’s New York victory as a “reminder of the frustrations many Americans have with an economic system that has left them struggling to afford basics like food, housing, and child care.”

“I assure you, Elon Musk having a trillion dollars, which I will note he does not have, but if he did have it, that money would not have anything to do with someone in New York feeding themselves. It’s literally got nothing to do with them starving on the streets,” Burguiere says.

“It’s got nothing to do with Elon Musk. He’s not doing this to people,” he adds.

Want more from Stu?

To enjoy more of Stu’s lethal wit, wisdom, and mockery, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Upload, Video phone, Camera phone, Sharing, Free, Video, Youtube.com, Stu does america, Stu burguiere, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Elon musk, Tesla, Elon musk trillionaire, Trillionaire, New york times, Leftist lies, Mainstream media lies, Mainstream media bias 

The state Senate in Indiana voted against a redistricting map that would have helped President Donald Trump’s plan to continue Republican control of the U.S. House of Representatives.

The president has successfully persuaded Republican-controlled legislatures in other states to redistrict their maps ahead of the midterm elections, but the effort failed in Indiana after a vote on Thursday.

‘Living in a free constitutional republic means we empower voters to make those decisions.’

All 10 of the state Senate’s Democrats and 21 Republicans voted to reject the map which had been passed by the Indiana House of Representatives. Only 19 voted in favor of redistricting.

In a lengthy statement on Wednesday, the president lambasted the Indiana Republicans who had come out against the redistricting map and threatened to support primary opponents to unseat them.

“Anybody that votes against Redistricting, and the SUCCESS of the Republican Party in D.C., will be, I am sure, met with a MAGA Primary in the Spring,” the president wrote on social media. “If Republicans will not do what is necessary to save our Country, they will eventually lose everything to the Democrats.”

Vice President JD Vance also criticized those Republicans after the vote.

“Rod Bray, the Senate leader in Indiana, has consistently told us he wouldn’t fight redistricting while simultaneously whipping his members against it. That level of dishonesty cannot be rewarded, and the Indiana GOP needs to choose a side,” he wrote on social media.

One Republican who opposed redistricting said the voters should decide the midterm elections, not through redrawing district maps.

“I, like a supermajority of you, do not want to see another Democrat Speaker of the House,” said Republican state Sen. Spencer Deery. “But that isn’t for me to decide, and it isn’t for anyone in this body to decide either. Living in a free constitutional republic means we empower voters to make those decisions.”

Some Republicans have reported violent threats over the redistricting debate.

“Unfortunately, my house was the target of a pipe bomb threat on Saturday evening. This is a result of the D.C. political pundits for redistricting,” state Sen. Jean Leising said.

RELATED: Supreme Court allows Texas redistricting map for midterm elections despite liberal dissent

“I fear for this institution, I fear for the state of Indiana, and I fear for all states if we allow intimidation and threats to become the norm,” said Republican state Sen. Greg Walker, who also claimed to have received threats about his opposition to redistricting.

Now those Republicans will likely face the ire of the president in future re-election campaigns.

“I will do everything within my power to make sure that they will not hurt the Republican Party, and our Country, again,” the president said regarding the Republican dissenters.

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

​Indiana republicans, Indiana redistricting, Trump to primary republicans, Republicans defy trump, Politics 

Unable to successfully impeach President Donald Trump, House Democrats have turned their ire against RFK Jr. — introducing impeachment articles against the Health and Human Services secretary after he “turned his back on science.”

“Yes, he has turned his back on science because, by the way, Dr. Fauci is the science, and he doesn’t like Dr. Fauci. I guess maybe this is their reasoning,” BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales scoffs.

“What is immediately obvious is the Democrats are not in power this time around. Like this is obviously not going to go anywhere. Nothing’s going to happen. This is all clearly performative,” Gonzales says.

Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.), the woman claiming she is impeaching RFK Jr., made a fool out of herself in 2020 yelling on the House floor while wearing latex gloves to protect herself from the COVID virus — and Gonzales hasn’t forgotten.

“This is the type of person who’s leading the charge to impeach RFK Jr.,” Gonzales says. “And I just, this is actually big news. I didn’t realize that we could just make up reasons to impeach people.”

“And I started thinking to myself … if we’re just making up reasons to impeach people, I think Republicans should say, ‘You know what, Democrats, we’ll play by your rules, that’s fine, that’s fine. You guys make these wacky rules, and we will play by them,’” she continues.

“We’re going to take that same energy and impeach some of the Democrats,” she adds.

This is what has inspired Gonzales’ 12 days of impeachments — in the spirit of Christmas.

“On the first day of impeachments … who other than [Rep.] Nancy Pelosi [D-Calif.]? Now her crime? Being a drunk,” she charges.

On the second day of impeachments, Gonzales would impeach Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) for “the crime of marrying her brother,” and on the third day, Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) for the crime of “being r*****ed.”

On the fourth day, Gonzales would like to see Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) impeached for the same crime as Crockett, and on the fifth day, “Pencil-neck [Sen.] Adam Schiff [D-Calif.] for the crime of mortgage fraud.”

“Now I would like to be clear. He’s not actually been convicted of these crimes, but that’s OK. It doesn’t matter because you were accused of it,” she jokes.

On the sixth day, “[Rep.] Jerry Nadler [D-N.Y.] for the crime of wearing his pants up to his neck,” and on the seventh, “[Rep.] Eric Swalwell [D-Calif.], for sh**ting himself on live TV, farting, I don’t know.”

James Boasberg comes in at number eight, for “being a rogue judge and blocking President Trump,” and closely following Boasberg is Ketanji Brown Jackson for the crime of “being a DEI hire and not knowing what a woman is.”

The tenth day is the “easiest sell,” with Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) for “sedition, because he actually committed it,” with Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) following on the eleventh day “for being a Temu version of Obama.”

“And on the final day, we’d like Beto O’Rourke because he was an embarrassment to the state of Texas. And he looks like the wacky, wild, inflatable guy that you see at car dealerships,” Gonzales says.

“I’m just saying,” she continues. “Republicans, grow some balls.”

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.

​Upload, Video phone, Video, Sharing, Camera 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, Rfk jr, Nancy pelosi, Haley stevens, Impeachment, Articles of impeachment, President donald trump, Jasmine crockett, Aoc, Adam schiff, Jerry nadler, Mark kelly, Ketanji brown jackson, Beto o’rourke 

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt had a fiery exchange with CNN journalist Kaitlan Collins over the president’s recent comments admonishing Americans to buy fewer gifts this Christmas for their children.

Collins pressed Leavitt on whether President Donald Trump’s comments contradicted his separate claim that the economy was recovering in his second term.

‘Everything I’m telling you is the truth, backed by real, factual data, and you just don’t want to report on it because you want to push untrue narratives about the president.’

“If the economy is as strong as the president has said it is, then why is he telling parents two weeks before Christmas that they should only buy two or three dolls for their children?” Collins asked.

“Look, what the president is saying is that if we want products made right here in America, if we want them to be made from American small businesses, which is a large part of the reason the president has effectively implemented tariffs, then we’re going to have better quality products right here in the United States,” Leavitt responded. “Maybe you’ll pay a dollar or two more, but you will get better quality, and you’ll be supporting your fellow Americans by buying American.”

She went on to claim that every economic measure has gotten better under the Trump administration, and she cited inflation and gas prices.

“So, the best is yet to come. The president is digging our country out of the economic hole that the previous administration put us in, and that’s what he’s talking about,” Leavitt said.

“We’ve covered the economy, but there’s mixed signals in terms of what that looks like,” Collins replied, adding that grocery prices have gone up during the Trump administration.

When Collins kept pressing Leavitt, the press secretary accused the reporter of a double standard and reminded her of the media’s complicity with the messaging from the previous administration.

“My predecessor was standing at this podium, but now you want to ask me a lot of questions about it, which I’m happy to answer, but I will just add, there’s a lot more scrutiny on this issue from this press corps,” Leavitt said.

RELATED: Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen admits Biden’s spending worsened inflation

“My predecessor stood up at this podium, and she said inflation doesn’t exist. She said the border was secure, and people like you just took her at her word, and those were two utter lies!” Leavitt continued. “Everything I’m telling you is the truth, backed by real, factual data, and you just don’t want to report on it because you want to push untrue narratives on the president.”

Video of the argument was posted to social media, where it was widely circulated and viewed.

Some polling has shown a loss of support for Trump’s policies related to the economy as the pivotal midterm elections grow closer.

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

​Kaitlan collins, Leavitt vs kaitlan collins, Economy, Inflation under biden, Politics 

Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck and his team, now working in conjunction with elements of the Trump administration, are in the process of rescuing a Canadian woman failed by her country’s socialist health care system and led into thinking the only remedy for her painful living-nightmare might be state-facilitated suicide.

The day after Canadian state media did its apparent best to frame the American intervention as “political posturing” and a “distraction from the real issues,” the Saskatchewan woman’s husband expressed his profound gratitude to Beck for his efforts to help Jolene Van Alstine.

‘If it was me, I think I would have had a gun to my head long ago.’

Miles Sundeen, speaking on Thursday to Beck in what became a tear-filled episode of “The Glenn Beck Program,” said at the outset, “First of all, I just wanted to say thank you so much. Apparently you’re a very popular guy. You’ve opened up a lot of doors.”

“It’s been a long and very arduous journey. It’s been over eight years now that Jolene has been very ill. We’ve gone through very tough times trying to get help through our health care system; long, long wait times both to see specialists, to get a diagnosis initially, and then, of course, to wait times for surgeries as well,” said Sundeen. “The problem is, of course, as this disease continues to devastate her body, it becomes worse and worse as time goes on.”

Van Alstine has a rare parathyroid disease called normocalcemic primary hyperparathyroidism, which causes nausea and vomiting and draws calcium from the bones into the blood, resulting in extreme bone pain, weakened bone density, and fractures. According to Sundeen, Van Alstine’s immobilization by the disease has also resulted in other conditions, namely diverticulitis and osteoporosis, not to mention “mental damage.”

While she has undergone multiple surgeries in hopes of addressing the disease, she still requires a specialized procedure to remove her overactive parathyroid gland.

The trouble is that there is presently no surgeon in her province able to perform the operation. While she could potentially receive the surgery elsewhere in Canada, Van Alstine has indicated that she must first obtain a referral but cannot secure one as none of the endocrinologists in her region are accepting new patients.

RELATED: Glenn Beck works to save pain-racked Canadian woman left at euthanasia dead end by broken socialist health care system

L: Alla Gnidenko/Getty Images; R: Blaze Media

Sundeen suggested that the endocrinologists and specialists aren’t necessarily to blame, noting that the Canadian health care system is “just absolutely overwhelmed.”

While Sundeen suggested that mismanagement is the system’s top problem, he noted that the system has also been “completely devastated” by underfunding and the huge influx of immigrants into the country.

According to the 2021 census, 23% of people living in Canada were foreign-born and 2.5% — over 924,000 — were nonpermanent residents. A government report released on Nov. 26 indicated that the 2021 census actually missed 38% of nonpermanent residents in that count. The top three national origins of the immigrants flooding into Canada under the Trudeau Liberal regime were India, Philippines, and China. Pakistan and Iran also made the top-10 list of national origins.

The sudden surge in demand on citizen resources helped strain a system that was already set for a reckoning with a graying population.

The apparent failure of the health care system is especially frustrating for Sundeen, who told Beck that “with this surgery, the parathyroid symptoms will disappear.”

“She can get back to an almost-normal life as far as the parathyroid hormone goes,” added Sundeen.

‘We’ll get it done.’

After years of pain and little evidence that her nation’s strained health care system will get around to helping her, Van Alstine started the process of joining the tens of thousands of other Canadians who’ll be killed under the government’s Medical Assistance in Dying euthanasia program, which has in recent years become one of the top five causes of death in Canada.

George Carson, a MAID approval doctor, confirmed this week that he assessed Van Alstine and provided her with his approval.

Sundeen stressed to Beck, however, that “she wants to live.”

“But when your life is absolutely stolen from you — stolen from you for eight years, and you suffer so much pain, depression, and anxiety — I love her with all my heart,” said Sundeen.

“She’s a strong girl. If it was me, I think I would have had a gun to my head long ago.”

— (@)

Beck emphasized to Sundeen that neither he nor his wife was alone.

“We’ll find a way to make this happen if it is at all possible. We pray for you. There are millions of people who are praying for you now, and we’ll do everything we can,” added Beck.

Beck indicated that he has been in contact with elements of the Trump administration, and there appears to be some movement on getting Van Alstine help in America.

He noted that a “very high-level administrative official just called and said, ‘Let’s save her life. We’ll get it done.'”

Beck has personally volunteered to fly her down, put her up, and set her up to meet some doctors.

Visibly moved by his conversation with Sundeen and fighting back tears, Beck noted that he hopes to be able to call him back with some “good news.”

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

​Jolene van alstine, Miles sundeen, Saskatchewan, Canada, Health care, Socialism, Socialist, Maid, Medical assistance in dying, Euthanasia, Disease, Glenn beck, Politics 

Dozens of House Democrats turned their back on their colleague who led the latest impeachment effort against President Donald Trump.

Texas Democratic Rep. Al Green’s effort to force a vote to impeach Trump failed miserably on Thursday in a 237-140 vote. Forty-seven Democrats, including all of the Democratic leadership, voted present, while 23 Democrats joined Republicans to table to motion altogether.

‘None of that serious work has been done.’

Although Democrats are typically enthusiastic when given the opportunity to kneecap the administration, both the leadership and the rank-and-file blocked the vote.

“We can’t just impeach someone with no process, without any investigation,” Democratic Rep. Ted Lieu of California said following the vote.

RELATED: Senate tanks GOP solution to Obamacare subsidy problems

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Democratic leadership echoed this critique, admitting that there was no formal basis to levy the charges against Trump.

“Impeachment is a sacred constitutional vehicle designed to hold a corrupt executive accountable for abuse of power, breaking the law, and violating the public trust,” House Democratic leadership said in a joint statement Thursday. “The effort traditionally requires a comprehensive investigative process, the collection and review of thousands of documents, an exacting scrutiny of the facts, the examination of dozens of key witnesses, congressional hearings, sustained public organizing, and the marshaling of the forces of democracy to build a broad national consensus.”

“None of that serious work has been done, with the Republican majority focused solely on rubber stamping Donald Trump’s extreme agenda,” the statement continues. “Accordingly, we will be voting ‘present’ on today’s motion to table the impeachment resolution as we continue our fight to make life more affordable for everyday Americans.”

RELATED: ‘Very low-IQ person’: Jasmine Crockett launches Senate campaign with funny video that may give the GOP the last laugh

Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

Green originally introduced the articles of impeachment for “Abuse of Presidential Power by Calling for the Execution of Members of Congress,” referencing Trump’s branding of the “Seditious Six” congressional Democrats who urged military servicemen to disobey supposedly “illegal” orders.

The second charge Green cited was the “Abuse of Presidential Power to Intimidate Federal Judges in Violation of the Separation of Powers and Independence of the Judiciary,” referring to Trump’s broad criticism of activist judges.

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

​House republicans, House democrats, Al green, Ted lieu, Hakeem jeffries, Democrat leadership, Donald trump, Trump impeachment, Politics 

A Hollywood actress lashed out at her critics after she called Charlie Kirk “hateful” in the wake of his assassination during a campus event in Utah in September.

Amanda Seyfried accused her critics of misquoting her, even as she doubled down on the criticism against the late conservative activist.

‘What I said was pretty damn factual, and I’m free to have an opinion, of course.’

Only days after his death, Seyfriend gave a three-word response to a post of some of Kirk’s comments: “He was hateful.”

She was hit with immediate backlash but doubled down in an interview with the “Who What Wear” digital fashion company.

“I’m not f**king apologizing for that. I mean, for f**k’s sake, I commented on one thing,” she said. “I said something that was based on actual reality and actual footage and actual quotes. What I said was pretty damn factual, and I’m free to have an opinion, of course.”

She also previously offered clarification on Instagram and accused people of taking her words out of context.

“We’re forgetting the nuance of humanity,” she wrote.

“I can get angry about misogyny and racist rhetoric and ALSO very much agree that Charlie Kirk’s murder was absolutely disturbing and deplorable in every way imaginable,” Seyfried added. “No one should have to experience this level of violence. This country is grieving too many senseless and violent deaths and shootings. Can we agree on that at least?”

RELATED: ABC extends Jimmy Kimmel contract despite outrage over Charlie Kirk comments

Photo by Richard Corkery/NY Daily News Archive via Getty Images

The shocking killing of Kirk at the Utah Valley University campus stunned the nation and led to many on the right and left calling for everyone to ease the rhetoric against their political opponents.

Seyfried is best known for her supporting role in the 2004 hit movie “Mean Girls.” She has since starred in other movies.

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

​Amanda seyfried, Celebs vs charlie kirk, Liberal celebrities, Social media backlash, Politics 

Joe Rogan surprised music star Jelly Roll with a huge announcement that brought the singer to tears during a Wednesday episode of “The Joe Rogan Experience.”

During the podcast, Rogan played a recorded video of country music artist Craig Morgan inviting Jelly Roll to become a member of the Grand Ole Opry.

‘God will make things bigger than your dreams.’

“Jelly Roll, you’re officially invited to become a member of the Grand Ole Opry,” Morgan stated.

Jelly Roll removed his headphones and placed his head in his hands, tearing up in response to the news. He then asked Rogan for a hug, and the two men shared an emotional moment.

“It don’t get no bigger in country music, bubba. That’s as big as it gets,” Jelly Roll told Rogan.

He explained that he once purchased tickets to watch Morgan perform at the Opry and was moved to tears by his song “Almost Home.”

RELATED: Country music star and former drug dealer Jelly Roll gives powerful testimony before Congress about dangers of fentanyl

Jelly Roll. Photo by Gabe Ginsberg/Getty Images for iHeartRadio

“It’s the most tear-jerking song about a homeless man, and it just reminded me of jail,” Jelly Roll said.

“I just remember thinking … ‘I want to make people feel the way he makes me feel.'”

“Well, you’ve done that, man,” Rogan told Jelly Roll.

“That feeling that he gave you, you’ve given to many, many people. It’s an incredible gift.”

Jelly Roll expressed that he had always dreamed of being on Rogan’s podcast. While he felt honored to be a guest on the show, he considered it an even greater honor to call Rogan a friend.

RELATED: Joe Rogan stuns podcast host with wild new theory about Jesus — and AI

Joe Rogan. Photo by Elsa/Getty Images

“I just never thought this was a journey, dude. I thought I’d die young, or I thought I’d kill myself. I didn’t think I was going to be able to figure it out,” Jelly Roll told Rogan.

“If God gets involved, you have a little humility, I think the rest can work itself out, Joe.”

“Amazing things can happen if you live your life true,” Rogan replied.

“I didn’t even dream of it,” Jelly Roll told Rogan. “God will make things bigger than your dreams. Somebody out there right now is dreaming of something, and it’s too small. Dream bigger, baby.”

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

​News, Jelly roll, Joe rogan, The joe rogan experience, Podcast, Country music, Music, The grand ole opry, Grand ole opry, Politics