Category: blaze media

OnlyFans “influencer” Bonnie Blue rose to fame after sleeping with over 1,000 men in a single day — and she doesn’t seem fazed by it one bit.

“The big 1,000 was completely done,” Blue happily said in a video posted to social media while clad in a robe. “The room was absolutely full. Then we did groups of five, like one after the other of fives. I wanted to give people more time, so then it went down to, like, one-on-ones.”

“So, like, one person would watch whilst I was with somebody, and then it would literally just be like a rotating circle,” she continued.

And Bonnie Blue might have even more news.

“There’s good news, everybody,” Stu Burguiere of “Stu Does America” says. “You’re going to be surprised to hear, if you took health class in eighth grade, that experience of having 1,000 different men inside of her may have — we don’t know for sure because we don’t know when this happened — but may have resulted in a pregnancy.”

“In just eight months’ time, I am so excited to do the world’s biggest livestream of a birth,” Blue said in another video uploaded to social media.

“Now, look, I don’t think a lot of people want to see her have sex with 1,000 men. I think it sounds pretty icky. But I assure you, no one wants to watch a livestream of the birth. That’s not a thing,” Stu comments.

But it’s not just the potential for a livestream that bothers Stu.

“We’re talking about an obviously horrible way to build a family, and I don’t even know how big that family would be. Would you have 1,000 different dads? Would you go on Maury Povich and maybe try to figure out who the dad was? That would be highly rated, I suppose,” he says.

“It’s a horrible way to conceive a child, a horrible way to go through this. This is — you’re going to be surprised to hear — not really all that biblical. It’s not the path to a nuclear family that most people would design,” he continues.

“That being said, that child still deserves a chance to live. Even a baby conceived in these bizarre and ridiculous circumstances still has value,” he says, adding, “In a very strange, roundabout way, she should be commended, and has a heck of a lot more moral fortitude than a lot of women who go and abort their child and end their lives for no good freaking reason.”

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.

​Camera phone, Video phone, Sharing, Free, Upload, Video, Youtube.com, Stu does america, Stu burguiere, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Bonnie blue, Pro life, Abortion, Anti abortion, Abortion rights, Feminism, Lily phillips, Feminist propaganda, Pro life message 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) revealed Tuesday that polls matter when they reflect poorly on President Donald Trump but are alternatively meaningless when Schumer himself is implicated as an incredibly unpopular politician.

After Senate Democrats’ weekly caucus lunch meeting, Schumer ambled over to reporters to recycle his usual anti-Trump rhetoric, this time framed as a critique of the president’s first 100 days in office.

“There is a feeling of incompetence, of indecision, and chaos eating away at much of the country,” said Schumer, “and that is emanating from the man who’s in charge, Donald Trump.”

Schumer claimed that the costs of cars, clothing, energy, and groceries are up, whereas “your retirement and 401Ks — down. The stock market? Down. The dollar — down. And today, we saw the trend continue. Consumer confidence? Down.”

‘Are you concerned that you may be a liability for your party?’

“Americans are noticing,” continued the Democrat. “The polls this week show Trump has the lowest 100-day approval rating since they started polling 80 years ago. The lowest. Even worse, 72% of Americans think it’s likely that Trump’s handling of the economy will walk us directly into a recession.”

A CNN poll conducted by SSRS indicated Sunday that Trump’s approval rating was 41%, the same result reached by a recent poll by the Economist/YouGov. An NPR/PBS News/Marist poll released Tuesday put the president’s approval rating at 42%. Emerson College and Rasmussen Reports polls both put Trump’s approval several points higher, at 45% and 50%, respectively.

Several minutes after using recent approval polls to attack Trump, CNN reporter Manu Raju asked Schumer, “There’s a poll out today that has your approval rating lower than any other congressional leader at 17%. Are you concerned that you may be a liability for your party?”

‘We are focusing on how bad Trump is.’

The Democratic senator’s approval rating is less than half of what Trump is netting at his worst.

While Schumer’s average approval rating is 27.9%, according to RealClearPolitics, the CNN poll that put the president at 41% indicated Schumer’s approval rating was 17% — the New York senator’s worst approval numbers in a CNN poll going back eight years.

Later Tuesday, CNN talking head Kaitlan Collins told Schumer that while the poll showed a dip in Trump’s approval, “It’s not exactly great for your party, either, because Democrats, or people who lean Democrat, according to CNN’s latest poll, say that they’re not satisfied with your party’s leadership.”

After highlighting Schumer’s abysmal approval rating and noting that 61% of respondents who identified as Democrats or lean toward the Democratic Party disapproved of its leadership, Collins asked Schumer, “Is that concerning to you?”

Schumer answered, “No,” then engaged in a few moments of cable news filibustering.

Collins later circled back to her question, pressing Schumer about how his approval rating bottomed out during Trump’s first 100 days back in the White House.

“Look, the polls come and go, OK?” said Schumer. “I’ve been through all the years, and I’ve seen them. I pay attention to doing the right thing. And when you do the right thing, things work out all right. We are doing the right thing. We are focusing on how bad Trump is.”

Although Schumer said he’s not concerned about his unpopularity, he should be since there is considerable interest among New Yorkers in having someone else take his seat.

A survey conducted in late March by the liberal firm Data for Progress found that in a head-to-head matchup, 55% of Democratic likely voters would support Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, whereas only 36% supported or leaned toward backing Schumer.

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

​Chuck schumer, Schumer, Democratic, Democrat, Senate, Polling, Approval rating, Poll, Donald trump, Trump, Aoc, Politics 

Ed Martin’s nomination to serve as U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia marks the most consequential confirmation of President Trump’s second term so far. Predictably, it’s also Senate Democrats’ top target. Blocking Martin would be a massive blow to the administration, derailing momentum and setting a dangerous new precedent for future nominations and legislation.

Democrats know it — and they’re all in.

In a matter of months, Martin has reoriented the US attorney’s office from a political weapon into a proper law enforcement agency.

If they succeed in stopping Martin, they’ll be emboldened. Future nominees will face the same obstruction.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) may understand Trump’s 20-point campaign platform better than most. He knows Trump’s political identity rests on a rare quality: keeping promises. Undermining Trump’s ability to deliver on those promises — especially while Democrats remain fractured on nearly everything else — would hand Schumer a major win.

That’s why Democrats have zeroed in on Martin.

He holds primary responsibility for delivering on Trump’s pledge to clean up Washington, D.C., and restore order ahead of America’s 250th anniversary in 2026. With the world watching, the nation’s capital cannot remain a showcase of chaos. Martin also oversees implementation of the president’s executive order titled “Making the District of Columbia Safe and Beautiful.”

He’s already delivering.

Unlike his predecessor, who obsessed over 1,600 low-level January 6 misdemeanor defendants, Martin has gone after serious crimes. He’s charged violent offenders targeting police, schools, and children. In March, he set a record with 18 federal gun crime charges — a mark he’s on pace to surpass. He’s seized over $200,000 from Hamas-linked actors, rescued 25 children from predators, and secured a 10-year sentence for a carjacker.

In a matter of months, Martin has reoriented the U.S. attorney’s office from a political weapon into a proper law enforcement agency.

Historically, D.C. U.S. attorney nominations were routine. Confirmations often happened by voice vote. Martin’s immediate predecessor, Matthew Graves — who prioritized nonviolent J6 prosecutions over spiraling violent crime — sailed through. So did Eric Holder, Bill Clinton’s pick, later Barack Obama’s self-described “wingman” in the Justice Department. Even in the face of an assassination attempt, one might expect President Trump to receive basic deference in selecting his top federal prosecutor.

So why the fight?

Democrats view blocking Martin as their best shot to stall the entire Trump agenda. If they win this round — especially before action begins on the tax and border reconciliation bill — they will exploit GOP hesitation and slow the administration’s rollout. It’s a savvy play, especially at a moment when Democrats and the left have few options.

No Senate Republican has publicly opposed Martin. But Democrats wouldn’t push this hard without sensing weakness. They’re dusting off their Kavanaugh-era playbook: smear campaigns, media pressure, and manufactured “process” complaints.

They’ve falsely painted Martin as anti-Semitic — based on an award he once gave to a person he didn’t know held anti-Semitic views. Martin later denounced the individual in no uncertain terms. He handed out dozens of awards that day, including to Jewish honorees. That hasn’t mattered to the same party that won’t denounce Hamas apologists in its own ranks.

Next came U.S. Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who claimed Martin’s assistance in helping Jan. 6 defendants secure local counsel created a “conflict of interest.” The D.C. Bar cleared Martin of any wrongdoing.

Now Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) has buried Martin in written questions and, via the Washington Post, accused him of noncompliance. The strategy is clear: overwhelm, confuse, smear, repeat.

Democrats also enjoy a tactical advantage. Martin’s interim appointment expires after 120 days — in other words, mid-May. Senate procedures reward delay, and some Republicans may prefer letting the clock run out to avoid a high-profile vote. But that strategy depends on silence.

And silence won’t last.

Public support for Martin continues to build. GOP inaction that produces the same outcome as a Democratic rejection won’t go unnoticed. There is no backdoor exit. Only forward movement will do.

Senate Republicans now face a clear choice: Hold the line or hand Democrats a tactical win with long-term consequences. Failing to confirm Martin risks turning every legislative priority — including future judicial and Supreme Court nominations — into an internal conference war.

The next few weeks will reveal what kind of Senate this is — and whether it will carry out the mandate voters gave to Donald Trump. Schumer, Durbin, Schiff, and their House allies like Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) are betting on Republican hesitation.

Let’s hope that they lose and that President Trump gets his prosecutor in D.C. so he can make the city safe and beautiful. America has a big birthday party coming up. Let’s not mess it up.

​Opinion & analysis, Ed martin, Us attorney, District of columbia, Senate confirmation, Donald trump, Chuck schumer, Crime, Hamas, Guns, Adam schiff, Dick durbin, Jamie raskin 

A Pennsylvania school teacher is facing 63 felony charges related to accusations that she sexually abused and supplied drugs to a student, according to authorities.

Michelle Mercogliano — a 35-year-old from Phoenixville, which is about an hour northwest of Philadelphia — reportedly has been charged institutional sexual assault, corruption of a minor, delivery of a controlled substance, unlawful contact with a minor, possession with intent to distribute, and other related offenses.

‘The calculated actions by this defendant are shocking and disturbing.’

The Chester County District Attorney’s Office noted that Mercogliano has yet to be arrested but is “cooperative and arranging an appropriate time to turn herself in via her attorney.”

Mercogliano is a special education teacher at Conestoga High School in Berwyn.

Family members of the alleged victim reportedly tipped off police about the child sex abuse accusations.

Blaze News obtained the affidavit of probable cause, which indicates the father of the alleged victim discovered marijuana packaging in the teen’s bedroom closet.

“The packaging received was for medical marijuana and had the name of Michelle Mercogliano on the label,” the affidavit states.

The DA’s office issued a statement saying Mercogliano had a “sexual relationship with a student attending Conestoga High School, where she was employed as a teacher.”

The DA claimed Mercogliano began a sexual relationship with a 16-year-old in February 2025.

The alleged victim told a detective he had sexual intercourse with the teacher approximately 12 times and that Mercogliano “had also performed oral sex on him on a similar number of occasions.”

Investigators determined that most of the sexual interactions occurred at the home of Mercogliano’s parents.

The affidavit of probable cause claimed Mercogliano drove the victim to a cannabis dispensary and purchased medical marijuana for him.

“After traveling to the marijuana dispensary, Mercogliano and the [alleged victim] would smoke the marijuana together and have sex, usually in a bedroom at her parents’ residence,” according to the affidavit.

The document added that Mercogliano “provided him with medical marijuana once a week since December of 2024, аpprоximately 15 times in total.”

Mercogliano used Snapchat and text messaging to communicate with the minor, according to the criminal complaint.

After law enforcement learned of the child sex abuse allegations, they “quickly launched a thorough investigation.”

The Tredyffrin/Easttown School District “immediately” placed Mercogliano on leave and barred her from all schools in the district after police notified the district of the sexual abuse allegations.

Superintendent Richard Gusick penned a letter to parents and faculty regarding the teacher’s “alleged unlawful conduct,” which said there’s “no information at this time” that other students were abused.

District Attorney Christopher L. de Barrena-Sarobe stated, “Parents and students should be able to trust their teachers. The defendant broke the law and destroyed that trust. It will not be tolerated.”

Tredyffrin Township Police chief Michael Beaty added, “The calculated actions by this defendant are shocking and disturbing. We are here to support the victim and his family as we collectively work to rebuild the trust damaged by her criminal endeavors.”

Police noted that this is an ongoing investigation and anyone with information on the case is urged to contact the Tredyffrin Township Police Department at 610-644-3221.

WPVI-TV reported that Mercogliano began teaching at the high school last fall. Previously, she taught at Hillside Elementary School from 2019 to 2024 and was a paraprofessional at Hillside Elementary and Valley Forge Elementary Schools between 2014 and 2018.

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

​Teacher arrested, Child sex abuse, Bad teacher, Teacher sex scandal, Teacher student sex scandal, Crime, Pennsylvania, Medical marijuana, Chester county 

Georgia authorities arrested 19 men over the course of a four-day sting operation aimed at flushing out sexual predators keen to molest and/or traffic children. Among those charged was a failed Democratic politician who apparently previously discussed killing President Donald Trump online.

While ultimately executed from April 24 to 28 by the Muscogee County Sheriff’s Office, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, and the Georgia Internet Crimes against Children Task Force, Operation Lights Out was apparently the result of months of planning and the collaboration of 12 law enforcement agencies at the federal, state, and local levels, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the U.S. Secret Service.

Undercover investigators posing as children engaged in conversation with various suspects on social media, dating websites, and other online platforms. In a number of exchanges, suspects allegedly “directed conversations with the child toward sex.”

According to the GBI, 35 cases were established that met the threshold for arrest on the basis of the investigators’ interactions online. However, in the 19 cases that ultimately resulted in arrests, suspects attempted to meet the “child” in person.

In some of these cases, suspects provided authorities additional cause to make an arrest, allegedly sharing pornography and other obscene content to the individual they figured for a child or asking the “child” to produce and send child pornography.

The arrestees, whose ages range from 21 to 68 and included at least three illegal aliens, “traveled from areas around Columbus, Georgia, with the intent to meet a child for sex,” said the GBI. “GBI digital forensic investigators were on hand during the operation to forensically process 21 electronic devices that were seized as evidence during the operation.”

Carl Sprayberry, a Democrat who ran last year for election to the Georgia House of Representatives but lost in a landslide to Republican state Rep. Carmen Rice, was among the suspected predators charged with human trafficking.

‘Closely monitor your children to ensure they are not communicating with these individuals.’

According to the Gateway Pundit, Sprayberry tweeted in February from his now-suspended X account, “Donald Trump has committed an act of High Treason. Should Congress refuse to take action, he will be killed by the people, as per the Second Amendment’s existence.”

In a subsequent post, Sprayberry reportedly implied that a U.S. Secret Service agent “should shoot him,” adding, “It’s time to kill Trump. This is why the Second Amendment exists.”

In a Feb. 19 tweet, he apparently wrote, “bomb Mar-a-lago,” the president’s Florida residence.

When campaigning against Rice, Sprayberry called his Republican opponent an “extremist who is out of touch with Americans” and characterized her pro-life views as “morally repugnant.”

Muscogee County Sheriff Greg Countryman said during a press conference on Wednesday, “It takes a sick individual to want to take away a right that a child has and the freedom and the safety and the comfort that a child has to bring harm to these children.”

“There were no children at harm at all in this,” said Brian Johnston, GBI special agent in charge. “Had we not been there as law enforcement working in an undercover capacity, these very same perpetrators that were arrested would have been talking to our children in our community and they would have been talking about sexual acts and meeting up for sexual acts and exchanging pornography.”

“I want to make a plea with parents to closely monitor your children to ensure they are not communicating with these individuals,” said Countryman. “These predators will travel from near and far to victimize your children. We take these crimes against children very seriously. It will be our focus to find these predators so they may be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

GBI noted that individuals with information about these cases or other cases of child exploitation in Georgia should contact the Georgia Bureau of Investigation Child Exploitation and Computer Crimes Unit at 404-270-8870 or report via the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children CyberTipline at CyberTipline.org.

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

​Crime, Pedophile, Human trafficking, Trafficking, Georgia, Carl sprayberry, Gbi, Carl spraybery, Democrat, Pervert, Muscogee county sheriff, Politics 

A group of charter schools serving Colony Ridge as well as other parts of Texas apparently places a heavy emphasis on Chinese language and culture, raising more eyebrows about an area already overloaded with ramshackle housing, high crime, dilapidated roads, and fetid water.

On March 27, International Leadership of Texas, better known as ILTexas, broke ground on ILTexas Liberty High School in the Santa Fe subsection of Colony Ridge. Once it opens sometime in the summer of 2026, the high school will be the third ILTexas school in the Colony Ridge area, joining ILTexas BG Ramírez K-8 and ILTexas MSG Ramírez K-8.

During the groundbreaking ceremony marking the occasion, ILTexas students paraded about with a Chinese dragon while traditional Chinese music played in the background. That presentation featured heavily in Colony Ridge’s YouTube video promoting the event.

‘China is now the second-largest economy, so more than ever, it is critical that future generations are prepared for today’s internationally connected world.’

Chinese also features prominently in the curricula at ILTexas schools. ILTexas schools claim to teach from a “global perspective,” and all students are expected to “master” the languages of English, Spanish, and Mandarin Chinese, its websites says.

The website spends little time discussing either English or Spanish. In fact, the default language setting on the website is British English, not American English. American English is not listed among the seven language options offered.

However, the website makes repeated reference to the importance of China and Chinese languages, especially Mandarin. In fact, ILTexas opened a school in China in 2016 with the promise of opening at least two others, though whether any of those schools remain open currently is unclear.

“China is now the second-largest economy, so more than ever, it is critical that future generations are prepared for today’s internationally connected world,” the website explains.

ILTexas also dedicated an entire month to celebrate the Chinese Lunar New Year. “Activities at campus celebrations include the Dragon Dance, Loop the Dragon, Beijing Opera Mask Painting, Chinese Calligraphy, Handmade Chinese Paper Lanterns, Dumpling-Making, and much more!” said a February 2024 press release.

A search of the word “Christmas” on the ILTexas website yielded just two results, and only one of those was about the holiday itself. However, even that news release was about a Toys for Tots campaign that mainly referred to the “winter holiday” or the “holiday season.” The only time the word “Christmas” was mentioned in the news release was in a quotation taken from the Marine Corps Toys for Tots nonprofit.

ILTexas founder and Superintendent Eddie Conger, a former teacher and retired Marine Corps officer, likewise places a heavy emphasis on Chinese-related education. In his bio for the Texas Charter School Association, Conger brags that he once “started a Chinese language and student exchange program” at a public high school in Dallas that eventually grew to include over 600 students.

At the groundbreaking ceremony in March, Conger indicated that the Chinese education students receive at ILTexas would open up opportunities in “national intelligence” for them. He described Chinese as a “national security language” and boasted about taking the top ILTexas students to the Chinese embassy in Washington, D.C.

Colony Ridge has also touted the partnership with ILTexas. “ILTexas has a program that gives kids an opportunity like no other school on the planet,” co-owner John Harris said in March.

“We believe that the trilingual curriculum and focus on critical thinking and problem-solving will help our students thrive in any field they choose to pursue,” Harris said about the opening of another Colony Ridge ILTexas school in 2023.

ILTexas did not respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.

One of the many complaints about Colony Ridge has been the fact that the sudden explosion in population in the area has led to overcrowded public schools. To learn more about this and other problems associated with the controversial development, check out the Blaze Originals documentary about it below:

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

​China, Mandarin, Colony ridge, John harris, Texas, Ed conger, Politics 

On April 27, 2025, Bill Belichick, the former New England Patriots head coach and current University of North Carolina football coach, appeared on “CBS Mornings” to promote his book, “The Art of Winning: Lessons from My Life in Football.”

Belichick attended the interview with his 24-year-old girlfriend, Jordon Hudson, in tow. Hudson, a former cheerleader and Miss Maine USA contestant, is listed as the chief operating officer of Belichick Productions.

At one point, CBS correspondent Tony Dokoupil noted Hudson’s attendance and described her as a “constant presence.”

He asked Belichick, “You have Jordon right over there. Everybody in the world seems to be following this relationship. … How did you guys meet?” But before Belichick could respond, Hudson interrupted from off-camera with a stern, “We’re not talking about this.”

Dokoupil pressed, but Hudson remained firm in her stance.

Liz Wheeler plays the “painful, cringey clip” of the moment.

Liz says it’s pretty clear who’s running the show, and it’s not Bill Belichick.

What makes Hudson’s response even weirder is that the story of how they met is already out.

“In February 2021, Belichick was traveling from the Boston area to Florida seated next to Hudson, then a college student and cheerleader. Sources say during that trip, Belichick leaned in to ask about Hudson’s schoolwork, specifically her deductive logic textbook,” Liz reads from an International Business Times article.

“Their conversation quickly became engaging with the pair diving into discussions about logic and reasoning. Belichick was reportedly so impressed that he signed the inside cover of her textbook, inscribing, ‘Thanks for giving me a course on logic,’ along with his signature. This gesture captured in a photo later obtained by TMZ marked the beginning of a connection that would quietly grow over the following years,” Liz continues.

“First of all, a photo is not just later obtained,” she corrects. “If it’s in her textbook, it was given to TMZ by Jordon Hudson … because she somehow and for some reason wanted their relationship to be public.”

Regardless, there’s almost certainly more to their relationship than just a serendipitous plane encounter.

Liz mentions a now-deleted social media post on X alleging Hudson, under a different last name but with the same first name and picture, was a high-end escort.

While unverified, if true, it would perhaps “explain not only the reticence to talk about how they met but also this weird, toxic, really disordered dynamic,” says Liz.

Another factor fueling speculation about the true origins of their relationship is Belichick’s friendship with Robert Kraft — the owner of the New England Patriots, who in 2019 was charged with two misdemeanor counts of soliciting prostitution.

“I’m not saying [Hudson] is a prostitute … but all of the elements that would exist if that allegation were true seem to be true in this case,” says Liz.

To see the clip of the Belichick’s interview and hear more of Liz’s commentary, watch the episode above.

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.

​The liz wheeler show, Liz wheeler, Jordon husdon, Bill belichick, Blazetv, Blaze media, High end escort, Robert kraft 

A beloved UFC trainer and coach accused actor Keanu Reeves of taking some of his unique techniques and using them in a movie.

Firas Zahabi is a legendary coach who runs the Tristar Gym in Montreal, Canada. Outside of owning the gym, Zahabi is most known for training former welterweight champion and all-time UFC great Georges St-Pierre.

During a podcast, Zahabi recalled teaching a student before finding out his name is Keanu. Upon learning that the student was Lebanese just like him, Zahabi wondered why someone of his ethnic background would have that name. Zahabi said the student informed him that actor Keanu Reeves was born in Beirut, and his parents were fans.

This jokingly shocked Zahabi, who said that Reeves “years ago, he stole one of my moves.”

Zahabi joked that he could not believe that a fellow Lebanese person would bite his style without crediting him. Zahabi said, in particular, that a scene from “John Wick: Chapter 2” used a jujitsu move he called the “web guard,” where one counters an opponent by jumping in the air and pulling them to the ground.

“It was a great move, it’s called the web guard. I used to call it the web guard. I used to rush people punching and kicking and then whenever they would grab a hold of me, if they grabbed me with an underhook, I would jump web guard. If I grab them with an underhook, I could also do it, so it didn’t matter to me, which is what I loved. As soon as we tied up, I could get the fight to the ground.”

Firas Zahabi (left) and former UFC champion Georges St-Pierre in 2018. Photo by Roy Rochlin/Getty Images

Zahabi showed a scene from the movie, known as the museum fight scene, and juxtaposed it with footage of his own technique in the gym.

“I put this move out of circulation,” Zahabi went on. “But then a man by the name of Keanu Reeves, the man actually dared to rip me off.”

‘When the white man steals from me, I’m not so upset. I expect it! But a fellow Lebanese?’

While most of his comments appeared to be in jest, Zahabi still fully went down the path of claiming Reeves, and assumedly his fight choreographer for the film, Chad Stahelski, had stolen his technique without crediting him.

He also made jokes that were sure to offend some.

“Now, I’m used to the white man stealing from me, but if he’s a fellow Lebanese, that’s the problem. Now that I know he’s a fellow Lebanese, I must insist that I collect from him. When the white man steals from me, I’m not so upset. I expect it! But a fellow Lebanese? This cannot go unpunished. He jumps web guard in the movie. Long story short, Keanu, you owe me massari.”

While Reeves was born in Lebanon, his parents are English and Hawaiian, which may change Zahabi’s feelings on the matter.

Stahelski reportedly started MMA in the early 1990s, however, while Zahabi did not start his martial arts journey allegedly until 1998.

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

​Mma, Fearless, Mixed martial arts, Ufc, Keanu reeves, Hollywood, Movies, Sports 

The Federal Reserve has rescinded its guidance for banks related to handling cryptocurrencies and digital assets.

In a recent press release, the Federal Reserve Board said it was removing guidance that forced banks to seek special permission before dealing with digital assets.

According to the release, a 2022 supervisory letter established an expectation that banks would provide advance notification of planned cryptocurrency activities, while updating the Reserve of ongoing ventures.

The justification for the requirements included market instability, money-laundering concerns, and consumer protection.

“Certain types of crypto-assets, such as stablecoins, if adopted at large scale, could also pose risks to financial stability,” the expunged letter read.

However, the board now says it will no longer expect banks to provide notification and will instead “monitor banks’ crypto-asset activities through the normal supervisory process,” the press release explained.

The 2023 letter, since withdrawn, required banks to demonstrate, “to the satisfaction of Federal Reserve supervisors,” that the bank had controls in place in order to conduct safe transactions surrounding cryptocurrencies. This was called a “supervisory nonobjection” where banks did not get to engage in an activity and then have it scrutinized, but rather they needed to submit their “proposed activities” to the Federal Reserve in order to move forward.

This was not a form of an approval process either, though, but rather a “nonobjection.”

Taking off more reins

The Federal Reserve board also said it would be working with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to determine if additional guidance to support innovation with crypto-asset activities is needed.

According to Crowdfund Insider, the OCC announced in March that it would be making its own changes to its Comptroller’s Handbook booklets and guidance. On change from the federal agency, which works within the Treasury Department, was that it would no longer examine institutions for “reputation risk.”

“The OCC’s examination process has always been rooted in ensuring appropriate risk management processes for bank activities, not casting judgment on how a particular activity may fare with public opinion,” said Acting Comptroller of the Currency Rodney E. Hood.

“The OCC has never used reputation risk as a catch-all justification for supervisory action. Focusing future examination activities on more transparent risk areas improves public confidence in the OCC’s supervisory process and makes clear that the OCC has not and does not make business decisions for banks.”

President Trump recently signed an executive order aimed at establishing a strategic Bitcoin reserve, which at the same time forbids the acquisition of other digital assets except through forfeiture proceedings.

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

​Return, Bitcoin, Crypto currency, Federal reserve, Trump administration, Banking, Tech 

GiveSendGo founder Jacob Wells has come under fire for platforming Karmelo Anthony, whose family has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars on the platform after Anthony allegedly stabbed and killed Austin Metcalf.

While the entire story of what really happened has yet to be told, Wells has defended his decision to platform Anthony from a position of Christian and conservative values.

“I’m sure you’re familiar with Kyle Rittenhouse,” Wells tells Jason Whitlock on “Jason Whitlock Harmony.” “When his campaign was kicked off of GoFundMe and every other platform, all the other crowdfunding platforms, Facebook shutting it down, whatever — it landed on our platform.”

“We saw massive amounts of hate from the left at that moment, massive amounts of information, misinformation, being posted throughout the media about the situation. And we said, ‘Well, you know what, there’s actually a principle here that people ought to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, not public opinion,’” Wells explains.

“It’s a biblical position,” he continues. “So we allowed that campaign. And then that kind of opened up the door where people said, ‘Well, here’s a platform that’s just not canceling people whenever, like GoFundMe has been and still does,’” he continues.

This reputation the platform has gained has attracted people who wanted to help people like the truckers in Canada and Daniel Penny.

“Daniel Penny’s campaign was another big one,” he says. “We’ve had many, many, legal defense funds for people that were accused of violent crimes, accused of murdering people by the prosecution.”

“And so we said, ‘You know what, this principle of presumption of innocence and not ruled by mobs really ought to be preserved in difficult circumstances,’ and that led us to where we are now,” he continues, noting that Karmelo Anthony’s family did not even start the campaign for him; it was someone else.

This was the same for Kyle Rittenhouse, as a stranger set up his GiveSendGo.

“So the Anthony family took over the campaign, and then in the process, a lot of fake news came out, as it does around all of these high-profile events, about the spending of funds, the use of funds being used for things like buying a Cadillac — fake news, not true — buying a house — fake news, not true — lots of fake news and a lot of racial tension narrative around it,” he explains.

“Pull race out of it; what the right really should be doing — and I would consider myself one, conservative, Christian, went to school to be a pastor, love people, understand that Jesus died for the worst of the worst, including myself,” he continues, “The right as being principled people ought to be saying, and this is what I didn’t see, is that ‘This is a horrible situation.’”

“The facts don’t look good for Karmelo Anthony, according to what we’ve seen so far,” he says, “But he ought to be given the same affording that was afforded to Daniel Penny and Kyle Rittenhouse.”

“Because as you begin to erode the principle for anyone, you begin to erode it for everyone,” he adds.

Want more from Jason Whitlock?

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

​Video phone, Upload, Camera phone, Sharing, Free, Video, Youtube.com, Jason whitlock harmony, Jason whitlock, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Karmelo anthony, Givesendgo, Austin metcalf, Racism, Anti racism, Racial tension, Kyle rittenhouse, Daniel penny 

President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Thursday directing the board of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and relevant agencies to terminate federal funding for National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service — not exactly the news that socialists may have wanted to hear on May Day.

“The CPB Board shall cease direct funding to NPR and PBS, consistent with my Administration’s policy to ensure that Federal funding does not support biased and partisan news coverage,” wrote Trump. “The CPB Board shall cancel existing direct funding to the maximum extent allowed by law and shall decline to provide future funding.”

Trump also targeted the liberal outfits’ indirect federal funding, directing the CPB — which has an operating budget of over $535 million for fiscal year 2025 — to ensure that “licensees and permittees of public radio and television stations, as well as any other recipients of CPB funds, do not use Federal funds for NPR and PBS.”

The loss of this indirect funding will be the more devastating.

While NPR claims that less than 1% of its annual operating budget comes in the form of grants directly from the CPB and other federal sources, multitudes of CPB-funded public radio stations in NPR’s massive syndication network pay for its programming.

Blaze News previously reported that consolidated financial statements show that the organization secured over $96.1 million in “core and other programming fees” in 2023, $93.2 million in 2022, $90.4 million in 2021, and $92.5 million in 2020.

“These station programming fees are one of NPR’s primary sources of revenue,” noted the media outfit. “The loss of federal funding would undermine the stations’ ability to pay NPR for programming, thereby weakening the institution.”

PBS similarly receives taxpayer dollars indirectly from CPB-funded public TV stations that pay for its programming.

According to PBS, its flagship “News Hour” program, for instance, receives roughly 35% of its “annual funding/budget from CPB and PBS via national programming funds — a combination of CPB appropriation funds and annual programming dues paid to PBS by stations re-allocated to programs like ours.”

A spokesman for PBS, which has over 330 member television stations, indicated earlier this year that the organization receives 16% of its funding directly from the federal government each year.

“Americans have the right to expect that if their tax dollars fund public broadcasting at all, they fund only fair, accurate, unbiased, and nonpartisan news coverage,” Trump noted in his order, titled “Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Biased Media.”

That is certainly not the case with NPR and PBS.

The Media Research Center conducted a study from June 1, 2023, to Nov. 30, 2024, analyzing political labels used by anchors, reporters, and contributors on PBS’ “News Hour.” PBS staff threw around the term “far right” or some variation thereof 162 times but used the term “far left” only six times.

PBS reporters and guests routinely deemed social conservatives and Trump-adjacent Republicans as “extreme” or “extremists,” and liberally applied the “fascist” label to Trump or his policies.

Meanwhile, the organization clamped down on unfavorable characterizations of failed presidential candidate Kamala Harris and other Democrats, writing the “Marxist” and “communist” labels off as “slurs.”

Another MRC study published last year tallied every comment made by PBS journalists during the Republican and Democratic national conventions. Of the 191 minutes of PBS commentary on the Republican National Convention, 72% of opinionated comments were reportedly negative, and only 28% were positive. The PBS’ DNC coverage was alternatively sycophantic.

NPR’s bias is similarly so substantial that Peabody Award-winning business editor Uri Berliner was willing to throw away 25 years at the outfit just to call it out.

Berliner, a liberal who characterized himself as something akin to the stereotypical NPR listener — “an EV-driving, Wordle-playing, tote bag-carrying coastal elite” — noted in an April 2024 op-ed that NPR had effectively transformed into a Democratic propaganda machine, working strenuously to “damage or topple Trump’s presidency,” in part by “hitch[ing] our wagon to Trump’s most visible antagonist, [then-]Representative Adam Schiff,” and amplifying the Russia collusion hoax.

‘Neither entity presents a fair, accurate, or unbiased portrayal of current events to taxpaying citizens.’

In addition to boosting “Russiagate” propaganda, Berliner noted that NPR — where 87% of the Washington, D.C., editors and reporters were registered Democrats and none were registered Republicans — evidenced its unmistakable bias with its coverage of the COVID-19 lab leak theory and the Hunter Biden laptop scandal, both of which the network downplayed.

The White House highlighted other examples indicating an ideological bent at NPR, noting for instance that it:

declared the Declaration of Independence to be a document with “flaws and deeply ingrained hypocrisies”;apologized for calling illegal immigrants “illegal”;concern-mongered about the choice of young men to abstain from masturbating to pornography;”routinely promotes the chemical and surgical mutilation of children as so-called ‘gender-affirming care’ without mentioning the irreversible damage caused by these procedures”; and“suggested doorway sizes are based on ‘latent fatphobia.'”

— (@)

Mike Gonzalez, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation who has long written about the need to defund public broadcasting, previously told Blaze News that NPR and PBS “gave up any attempt at appearing impartial or objective in any way,” adding that in the case of NPR, the choice of Katherine Maher as CEO was a crystal-clear message that things won’t soon change for the better.

“Maher, on the record, is calling Trump racist. She was an enthusiastic supporter of Kamala Harris,” said Gonzalez. “She’s on the record as saying the First Amendment and our obsession with truth is getting in the way of consensus. Well, gee — that’s the CEO of NPR. Anything else you need to know?”

Trump noted that “no media outlet has a constitutional right to taxpayer subsidies, and the Government is entitled to determine which categories of activities to subsidize.”

“The CPB’s governing statute reflects principles of impartiality: the CPB may not ‘contribute to or otherwise support any political party,'” continued the president. “The CPB fails to abide by these principles to the extent it subsidizes NPR and PBS. Which viewpoints NPR and PBS promote does not matter. What does matter is that neither entity presents a fair, accurate, or unbiased portrayal of current events to taxpaying citizens.”

In addition to emphasizing the biased nature of NPR and PBS, Trump noted that the ubiquity of media alternatives precludes any need for taxpayers to continue the liberal outfits.

‘Trump is working to ensure taxpayer dollars are no longer wasted on progressive pet projects.’

“Government funding of news media in this environment is not only outdated and unnecessary but corrosive to the appearance of journalistic independence,” added the president.

Trump further directed the heads of all federal agencies to “identify and terminate, to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law, any direct or indirect funding of NPR and PBS,” and tasked Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to investigate the liberal outfits for possible employment discrimination.

Trump gave the CPB board until June 30 to effectuate his order.

When NPR learned of a draft for the order, it stated earlier this month, “Eliminating funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting would have a devastating impact on American communities across the nation that rely on public radio for trusted local and national news, culture, lifesaving emergency alerts, and public safety information.”

“We serve the public interest. It’s not just in our name — it’s our mission. Across the country, locally owned public media stations represent a proud American tradition of public-private partnership for our shared common good,” added the liberal outfit.

PBS CEO Paula Kerger reportedly said last month than an order to defund her organization would “disrupt the essential service PBS and local member stations provide to the American people.”

The CPB, which is not a federal agency, has already filed suit against Trump because the White House attempted to fire three of its board members.

“Because CPB is not a federal agency subject to the President’s authority, but rather a private corporation, we have filed a lawsuit to block these firings,” the corporation said in a statement obtained by CNN.

The CPB is likely to seek to block this effort as well.

The White House noted that “President Trump is working to ensure taxpayer dollars are no longer wasted on progressive pet projects, but rather used to benefit hardworking Americans.”

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

​Katherine maher, Npr, Pbs, Public broadcasting, State media, Propaganda, Leftism, Donald trump, Executive order, Ending taxpayer subsidization of biased media, Bias, Media bias, Media, Paula kerger, Politics 

The Senate moved quickly to confirm President Donald Trump’s Cabinet and several key sub-Cabinet positions, including the FBI director and the director of national intelligence. But now, it appears ready to coast through the spring while critical posts remain unfilled. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) could solve the problem in a week — but only if he’s willing to put in long days and late nights.

This isn’t ceremonial work. These vacancies include essential positions, such as ambassador to the United Kingdom — just as the U.S. enters high-stakes trade negotiations with a key ally. The list also includes the undersecretary of defense and the head of the National Counterterrorism Center within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

It shouldn’t be fantasy to expect a Republican-controlled Senate to work a full week — just once — to help the president build his team.

It doesn’t stop there. The comptroller of the currency at the Department of the Treasury — a post responsible for monitoring the health of U.S. and global banks — remains vacant. So does the director of the Office of Personnel Management, who oversees hiring across the executive branch, including the White House.

Roughly 30 nominees have cleared their Senate committees and now sit idle on the executive calendar, waiting for a vote. One of the most recent is Brian Burch, tapped to serve as ambassador to the Holy See. While the Vatican may not be the most strategic post on the geopolitical chessboard, the United States would be wise to have a representative in place when 1.4 billion Catholics prepare to select their next pope.

The president can’t carry out the most ambitious conservative agenda in a generation without a fully staffed administration. Waiting until August —
as the Senate reportedly plans — is unacceptable.

Here’s the reality.

The Senate’s constitutional role of advice and consent operates on two separate calendars: a legislative calendar and an executive calendar. Right now, the Senate is on the legislative calendar while it handles the budget and other bills. It can’t switch back and forth between calendars at will — unless it has unanimous consent, which it doesn’t. These days, switching to the executive calendar reliably burns 30 hours.

That’s why Thune must act with precision. On a Thursday, before senators flee town for the weekend, he should bring up every nomination on the executive calendar. He should then file cloture on each one individually. That would tee them up for debate starting Monday.

It’s not complicated. It just takes leadership and a willingness to work.

Thune needs to level with his members: We’re staying until the job’s done. This will take time. Senators typically stroll into Washington late Monday and skip town by mid-Thursday — meaning the average Senate “workweek” barely stretches past two days. That needs to end now. Weekend plans can wait.

Most of these pending nominations aren’t Cabinet-level or sub-Cabinet-level posts, so the minority’s power to stall is limited. Democrats can only hold up each vote for two hours. The Senate could start early, stay late, work overnight — whatever it takes. Even if Democrats drag their feet on every single nominee, the whole batch could be confirmed in roughly 70 hours.

Will they dig in for the full two hours on all 30 nominees? Maybe. But more likely, they’ll cave after a few long days. Democrats have lives, families, and fundraisers too.

If Republicans want to shorten the slog, they need to make the Democrats talk. That means showing up and holding the floor. Last year, Thune faced this same problem when he tried to advance the nomination of the Joint Chiefs chairman. Nine members of the majority leader’s own party skipped the 1 a.m. Friday vote! Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), for example, a rock-solid conservative but also no great friend of military brass, had tickets to the Masters Tournament.

I get it: That’s a cool thing for sure, but the weekend tournament is over, so no more excuses.

The dirty secret? Senators hate being on the floor. Despite the job description, they get fidgety, hungry, and thirsty — for more than just water.

So make it fun.

When I need a newsroom full of reporters to put in a 16-hour day — or just stay late — I use a trick that works every time: pizza and beer. It works across generations. Stock a conference room with food. Load the Republican Cloakroom with booze. Come on, folks — this is work, and
it can be fun.

They might even enjoy it. Until they don’t.

Eventually, some senior (or just tired) Democrats will tell their colleagues to knock off the stalling tactics so everyone can go home. This doesn’t need to drag into Saturday. But Thune needs to make it clear: If that’s what it takes, he’ll go that far — and his conference will back him up.

Remember, we live in a post-nuclear Senate. Thanks to the late former Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), confirmations now require only 51 votes. No filibuster, no excuses.

Of course, Democrats could make this easier. If they agree to stop delaying the inevitable, Republicans can hang out in their offices all they want and still finish the job.

None of this is easy. But it shouldn’t be fantasy to expect a Republican-controlled Senate to work a full week —
just once — to help the president build his team.

It’ll take cajoling. It’ll take Grubhub. It’ll take more than a few cases of beer and wine. But it’s doable — and well worth it.

Sign up for Bedford’s newsletter

Sign up to get Blaze Media senior politics editor Christopher Bedford’s newsletter.

​Politics 

A new study from the University of California at Berkeley, of all places, reveals that physicians specializing in obstetrics and gynecology are not fleeing states that have restricted induced abortions in the wake of the 2022 Dobbs decision from the U.S. Supreme Court.

To better understand the implications of the study, Blaze News spoke with Dr. Christine Francis, a board-certified OB/GYN with decades of experience, a current obstetrics hospitalist who specializes in high-risk pregnancies and deliveries, and the CEO of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

‘Opposite to the expected finding if OBGYNs were leaving states where abortion is threatened.’

The study, published by JAMA on April 21, which obviously presumes abortion to be a critical component of “quality” OB/GYN care, surveyed more than 60,000 OB/GYNs to determine whether the Dobbs decision might impact where they decided to practice medicine. To the surprise of authors Becky Staiger and Valentin Bolotnyy, abortion policies in the individual states “did not significantly” affect the number of OB/GYNs working there.

The authors attempted to minimize the results, stating only that “there were no significant differences in trends in OBGYNs’ practice locations across states with different abortion-related policy environments after the Dobbs decision.”

But that assertion ignores a key finding from the study: States with the most permissive abortion laws post-Dobbs saw the smallest increase in the number of OB/GYNs. While all states apparently had an increase, according to the study, permissive states saw just a 7.7% increase, while states with abortion bans saw an increase of 8.3% and those that have “threatened” abortion saw a startling 10.5% increase.

These results left Staiger and Bolotnyy scratching their heads. Staiger has a Ph.D. in health policy and management and has attempted to identify “racial health disparities” in public health insurance programs in New York. Bolotnyy’s Ph.D. is in economics, and he is tied to the Deliberative Democracy Lab at the Center on Democracy at Stanford University.

“The only statistically significant difference suggested that the share of physicians who are OBGYNs decreased less in threatened states than in protected ones, opposite to the expected finding if OBGYNs were leaving states where abortion is threatened,” the authors ultimately determined (emphasis added).

The conclusion of the study was so out of step with liberal orthodoxy that Dr. Francis made a point of expressing her appreciation to Staiger, Bolotnyy, and JAMA for publishing it even though “it theoretically goes against the … prevailing political narrative.”

“We need to give credit where credit is due,” Francis said.

‘Induced abortion can’t be part of comprehensive reproductive health care if reproductive health care specialists … are not doing it.’

Unlike the authors and the journal, though, Dr. Francis is not at all surprised by the findings of the study. She told Blaze News that they merely reaffirmed what she and her group, AAPLOG, have known all along: that restrictions on abortion would not have any meaningful impact on the vast majority of practicing OB/GYNs.

The main reason they were so confident that Dobbs would have little effect on OB/GYNs is that so few OB/GYNs perform induced abortions. According to statistics Francis cited, anywhere from 76% to 93% of all practicing OB/GYNs do not offer abortions.

“Induced abortion can’t be part of comprehensive reproductive health care if reproductive health care specialists, the vast majority of them, are not doing it,” Francis explained.

Francis noted that such statistics cast doubt on talking points and narratives promulgated by what she called “the abortion industry.” Such narratives have attempted to dupe people into thinking that any abortion restrictions will lead to compromised medical care for women.

False though it may be, the presumption that quality health care for women depends on the ready availability of elective abortion appears to be far-reaching. A quick internet search turned up articles and research that all insisted the Dobbs decision posed a real threat to women and doctors:

“In states with strict abortion policies, simply seeing an OB/GYN for regular care can be difficult,” claimed a headline from NBC News.
“States With Abortion Bans See Continued Decrease in U.S. MD Senior Residency Applicants,” warned a study from the Association of American Medical Colleges.
“Over time, the inability of abortion-restrictive states to recruit new and existing clinicians will exacerbate widening health workforce disparities, with negative consequences for health care access, quality, and outcomes,” wailed a Health Affairs Scholar study.

Even a January 2024 article from JAMA suggested that abortion bans had created an “occupational health crisis for OB-GYNs,” who reported experiencing anxiety and “moral distress,” fears about possibly violating the law, and even symptoms of depression.

Not only does the new study challenge some of those reports, since the number of OB/GYNs seems to be growing across the board despite Dobbs, but, according to Francis, the increase in numbers of OB/GYNs in pro-life states likewise suggests better medical care for the women living there.

“Women that live in states that decided to protect life, it seems, have actually better access to the care of an OB/GYN,” she explained.

Francis described that trend as “encouraging” and “heartening” and expressed hope that it will continue.

Francis cautioned that while the study indicates that states that ban or restrict abortion have enjoyed a higher increase in OB/GYN counts since Dobbs, the study did not attempt to determine the reasons that some physicians moved to a new state.

In fact, Francis said she personally knows multiple physicians who left Indiana and its near-total abortion ban specifically because they wanted to continue performing elective abortions. Still, she claimed that pro-lifers should be encouraged that abortion restrictions have not prompted OB/GYNs to leave states in droves, as had been expected.

“At the very least,” she said, “these pro-life laws are not discouraging OB/GYNs from either coming to that state to practice or remaining in that state if they were already in that state.”

Moreover, Francis continued, by staying put regardless of abortion restrictions, OB/GYNs are signaling the irrelevance of abortion to the overall care they provide. To demonstrate her point, Francis imagined how she might react to restrictions on an obstetrics procedure she considers essential.

“If I was trying to practice in a state that said you can’t do a C-section for any reason,” Francis explained, “then I would probably leave that state because I wouldn’t be able to provide good care to my patients.”

Though promising, the new study is by no means a game-changer and will likely have no impact on any abortion laws at the local, state, or national level. However, it does at least call into question prevailing pro-abortion assumptions as well as demonstrate a willingness from apparently doctrinaire leftists to follow the truth wherever it leads.

As Francis neatly summarized, “This study just goes into that group of studies that help support the notion that we see in real-life, everyday practice that induced abortion is not a part of good health care.

“It’s not a part of essential reproductive health care.”

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

​Obgyn, Obstetrics and gynecology, Abortion, Dobbs, Abortion ban, Restrictions, Jama, University of california berkeley, Pro-life, Politics, T3 

Amid all the turmoil involving Harvard — most recently, the Trump administration withholding federal grants and making it the poster child for academic rot — the poison Ivy League’s liquidity problem is worsening. In the past two months, Harvard has turned to the bond markets twice to quickly raise over $1 billion in cash. This follows a scramble in 2024 to raise $1.5 billion through similar bond offerings, which still fell short of its initial target.

Revulsion to Harvard’s institutional wokeness and its embrace of open anti-Semitism by faculty and students was already causing a financial squeeze. As I wrote in November: “Despite an endowment exceeding $50 billion, Harvard had to expedite bond offerings earlier this year to quickly raise $1.6 billion in cash.” Harvard was already in a cash crunch before President Donald Trump announced he was turning off the spigot of federal grants.

Harvard cannot afford to also lose its revenue stream from the federal government — but it’s going to.

But why is Harvard facing a liquidity crisis if its endowment is truly worth $53 billion as reported? Per published reports as of 2024, only about 20% of Harvard’s endowment is held in liquid assets such as cash, stocks, and bonds. The remaining 80% is tied up in illiquid investments — 71% in private equity and hedge funds and another 8% in real estate and other alternative assets.

While the endowment appears impressive on paper, it produces relatively little usable cash for Harvard — roughly $2 billion annually. And when the market turns south, as it recently has, the financial gimmickry underpinning these investments can actually consume cash.

A liquidity crisis

In early March, Harvard announced it would return to the debt markets to raise $450 million in cash via tax-exempt bonds. Barely five weeks later, the university had to rush another $750 million bond offering — this time in taxable bonds — bringing its total new debt to $1.1 billion. According to the Harvard Crimson, this pushes the university’s total debt burden to $8.2 billion.

Despite its wealth, Harvard relies on billions of dollars in non-tuition revenue each year to pay its bills. In the fiscal year ending June 30, 2024, the university reported $6.5 billion in operating revenue. Of that, just 21% came from tuition. Nearly half — 45% — came from philanthropic donations, while federal grants comprised another significant portion.

With the donors starting to hold their noses and sit on their wallets, Harvard cannot afford to also lose its revenue stream from the federal government — but it’s going to. The Trump administration recently announced that it would suspend $2.2 billion in federal grants.

Consequences of ‘wokeness’

Meanwhile, Harvard President Alan Garber remains committed to admissions policies that appear racially discriminatory, as well as remaining steadfast in his commitment to keeping Harvard a welcoming space for foreign nationals who are hostile to Jews. As reported by CNN:

Harvard refused to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, ban masks at campus protests, enact merit-based hiring and admissions reforms, and reduce the power of faculty and administrators the Republican administration has called ‘more committed to activism than scholarship.’

Despite Garber’s repugnant principles, they also invite more problems for the school. Like Bob Jones University before it, Harvard’s policies are racially discriminatory. Bob Jones University lost its tax-exempt status for racially discriminatory admissions policies and prohibiting interracial dating. Now Harvard may suffer the same fate:

The Internal Revenue Service is making plans to rescind the tax-exempt status of Harvard University, according to two sources familiar with the matter, which would be an extraordinary step of retaliation as the Trump administration seeks to turn up pressure on the university that has defied its demands to change its hiring and other practices.

Donors have long benefited from itemized tax deductions for their munificent donations to Harvard’s operating budget. If Harvard loses its tax-exempt status, donations will no longer be tax-deductible. While I do not doubt that donors had a genuine passion for Harvard while donating to the school, the tax ramifications were also a motivator. Losing the tax deductibility of donations would constrict that revenue stream even further.

Out of cash, out of time

Ultimately, Harvard’s multibillion-dollar bond offerings may barely serve as a Band-Aid if federal and donor revenue streams dry up. However illiquid the famed endowment may be, the university may soon be forced to start selling what assets it can. According to New York Post columnist Charles Gasparino, “Wall Street execs who follow the college endowment business say it’s only a matter of time before Harvard starts selling what’s liquid in its portfolio, i.e., stocks.” He is also trying to confirm if Harvard is, in fact, already selling liquid assets held by the endowment.

Harvard cannot borrow its way out of its cash crisis. For now, the university scrambles for more loans to cover bills and meet payroll. But lenders will not endlessly bankroll unsecured debt from a tarnished institution bleeding cash. A day of reckoning approaches.

​Opinion & analysis, Harvard university, Donald trump, Debt, Bond, Wokeness, Universities, Private equity, Liquidity crisis, Federal funding 

We thought the Supreme Court had finally purged anti-religious discrimination from Establishment Clause jurisprudence. After years of confusion — conflating the ban on state-sponsored religion with an invented mandate to scrub faith from public life — the Court, through a series of rulings on religious schools and public funding, had restored sanity. It returned the law to its pre-Warren era understanding: Equal treatment of religion does not violate the Constitution.

Yet, here we are again.

Those who claim that equal treatment of religion violates the Establishment Clause are the ones betraying its meaning.

In a move that stunned observers, Oklahoma’s own Republican Attorney General Gentner Drummond and the state supreme court now argue that states cannot recognize religious charter schools.

On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond. The case centers on St. Isidore, a Catholic online school seeking to join Oklahoma’s charter school system. Drummond contends the school’s religious affiliation disqualifies it. He sued the state charter board — a move usually made by the ACLU or militant secularist groups.

The Oklahoma Supreme Court sided with him. The court claimed that granting charter status to a Catholic school would violate the First Amendment by effectively establishing Catholicism as a state religion. Justices labeled charter schools “state actors” and argued that any religious affiliation disqualifies a school from public recognition.

This logic turns the First Amendment on its head. The Constitution does not require hostility toward religion. It requires neutrality. Denying a religious school access to a public benefit — simply because it is religious — violates precedent.

Oklahoma’s Charter Schools Act permits any “private college or university, private person, or private organization” to apply for state funding to open a charter school. Excluding religious applicants contradicts not one but three major Supreme Court rulings.

In Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia Inc v. Comer (2017), the court ruled that excluding a religious school from a public benefit for which it is otherwise qualified “solely because it is a church” is “odious to our Constitution.” That case involved a grant for playground resurfacing. If states can’t deny rubber mulch, they can’t deny full charter status.

In Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue (2020), a 5-4 majority held that state constitutions barring aid to religious institutions over secular ones violates the Free Exercise Clause. Public benefits, the Chief Justice John Roberts emphasized, cannot be denied “solely because of the religious character of the schools.”

Then came Carson v. Makin (2022), where Maine tried to distinguish between religious status and religious use, barring religious schools from voucher funds. The court rejected the distinction. Roberts, writing again for the majority, ruled that the program “operates to identify and exclude otherwise eligible schools on the basis of their religious exercise.” He warned that attempts to judge how a religious school carries out its mission invite unconstitutional state entanglement.

So how, after such ironclad precedent, do we find a Republican state attorney general and a court in a state Trump carried in every county ruling that religious schools can’t even apply for public funding?

The answer lies in years of lukewarm Republican control. These are Republicans in name only, who blocked judicial reform and refused to challenge activist courts. Now, Drummond wants a promotion. He’s announced his run for governor after already overruling the state education superintendent’s decision to ban pornography in public libraries.

This case reveals a larger pattern. Courts act as a one-way ratchet. Even after strong Supreme Court rulings, liberal lower courts defy precedent. They delay, split hairs, and distinguish without merit. The high court may reverse Oklahoma, but its rulings rarely secure lasting victories.

And the irony? Those who claim that equal treatment of religion violates the Establishment Clause are the ones betraying its meaning.

During the House debate on the First Amendment in 1789, James Madison explained: “Congress should not establish a religion, and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience.”

That principle — freedom of conscience without coercion — shaped the American experiment. Far from excluding religion, the founders assumed its influence. As Alexis de Tocqueville wrote, “The Americans combine the notions of religion and liberty so intimately in their minds, that it is impossible to make them conceive of one without the other.” He added that politics and religion formed an “alliance which has never been dissolved.”

It’s time for the Supreme Court to reaffirm that alliance — clearly, decisively, and without leaving room for lower courts to ignore. And in Oklahoma, it’s time to elect Republicans who still believe the Bible belongs in the Bible Belt.

​Gentner drummond, Oklahoma, Oklahoma statewide charter school board v. drummond, Charter schools, Religion, First amendment, Establishment clause, Rino republicans, Red states, Blue states, Aclu, Lawsuits, Supreme court, John roberts, Trinity lutheran v. comer, Espinoza v. montana department of revenue, Carson v. makin, James madison, Alexis de tocqueville, Daniel horowitz, Opinion & analysis 

If you say the word “chemtrails” to any government-trusting American citizen, you’ll be painted as a nutty right-wing conspiracy theorist.

However, there’s good news for those who’ve been sounding the alarm. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has recently confirmed the use of chemtrails over America — and so has an Air Force whistleblower and exposure scientist, Kristen Meghan, who’s been making claims about a secret government chemtrail program for over a decade.

Meghan has worked in occupational environmental safety and health as a senior industrial hygienist and an exposure scientist for 23 years. For nine of those years, she worked on active duty in the Air Force in a field called bioenvironmental engineering.

“So, for people to understand, it’s like the DOD’s equivalent of OSHA, EPA, DOT,” Meghan tells Sara Gonzales on “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered.”

When her brother showed her a documentary on chemtrails, Meghan recalls believing it was “the most ridiculous thing” she’d ever heard.

“In my journey of trying to debunk it and basically tell everyone they’re ridiculous, I realized not only is it real, but it’s coming right through my office,” she explains. “A lot of people that have industrial jobs are familiar with something called a safety data sheet.”

“Basically, there’s certain things that are on those sheets, and it has to have packing group information. Like, if you’re shipping it, is it double-contained, all these things. It was missing so much information, and I always say I’m never going to jail for anybody,” she continues.

“Then later, it hits me,” she says. “These same things that are coming in, like powdered oxide form — these heavy metals are the same metals that people are claiming.”

Before telling anyone, she did tests on her own.

“I started doing soil sampling, air sampling, different types of techniques, and … I finally went to my supervisors and was like, ‘Is this this?’” she tells Gonzales.

“There’s things that I can’t tell you, but I’m telling you the aircraft was being retrofitted, and that is the earth-shattering moment,” Meghan adds.

In 2008, just a few days prior to telling her supervisors, Meghan had won noncommissioned officer of the quarter for her exemplary performance. Right after, she began being treated differently.

“They threw the, ‘Are you okay?’ You know, ‘You’re looking a little depressed. I can put you on a 120-day mental hold. Who would watch your daughter?’” she recalls. “I was actually supposed to re-enlist, and without any warning, with about 10 days left, I was out the door. No job.”

“It scared my higher-ups, and I immediately got an attorney, got whistleblower protection, and I was very vocal for a long time,” she continues, noting that they’ve “admitted” why they do this.

“It’s to dim the sun because of global warming,” she says, adding, “but I wonder, though, if a lot of people that are behind this actually believe in global warming.”

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

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

​Sharing, Video phone, Video, Upload, Camera phone, Free, Youtube.com, Sara gonzales, Sara gonzales unfiltered, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Chemtrail, Contrails, Chemtrails, Robert f kennedy, Dim the sun, Bill gates, Chemtrail whistleblower, Air force whistleblower, Air force 

New York Times columnist David Brooks’ recent essay in the Atlantic mourned the corrosion of America’s moral fabric. Naturally, Donald Trump is to blame.

Trump’s “narcissistic nihilism,” Brooks argues, is driven by a single philosophy: “Morality is for suckers.” Christian virtues are for the weak. Nietzschean pagan values of power, courage, and glory are for winners. And although many in Trump’s administration “have crosses on their chest,” they harbor “Nietzsche in their heart.” This “deadly cocktail” has transformed America into an entity unrecognizable from the “force for tremendous good” that, according to Brooks, was laid in its coffin on January 20, 2025.

Trump’s appeal to many wasn’t that he embodied virtue. Rather, it was that he promised to protect what remained of the institutions that made virtue possible.

Brooks isn’t the first to hurl such accusations against the president, though, admittedly, he does so in a manner that tickles my philosophical fancy. America’s moral decline has been an issue of concern long before Trump took office.

But is Trump — or any single political leader — really to blame?

Politics follows culture

Like many veterans of the political class, Brooks puts too much faith in institutions. Both parties cling to the comforting illusion that culture flows downstream from politics. Spend enough time inside the D.C. bubble, and even sincere conservatives start to believe that electing the “right” people or passing the “right” laws can do more than govern — that politics can redeem souls from moral collapse.

But pretending policy carries no moral weight is equally foolish. Ask anyone who’s lived under a truly corrupt regime. Still, culture shapes politics more than Washington bureaucrats care to admit.

Diagnosing America’s cultural decline requires more than scolding a single president or passing a bill. It means examining the social landscape that produced such politics in the first place. To understand Washington, we must first look to the soul of the voters who send their leaders there.

Yes, speaking of a national “soul” risks painting in broad strokes at the expense of nuance. Even Brooks would likely concede this much. Americans are desperately reaching for moral touchstones that the culture once upheld. Those touchstones — faith, family, tradition — have been torn down by the very ideologues Trump was elected to oppose.

Up from disillusionment

Brooks concedes a sliver of the truth, admitting that the left has built “a stifling orthodoxy that stamped out dissent.” But his diagnosis barely touches the depth of America’s moral confusion.

More than 40 years ago, Alasdair MacIntyre warned in “After Virtue” that modern society had gutted the moral framework needed to make moral language coherent. Today, we still invoke that language — justice, dignity, meaning — but with no shared foundation beneath it. Efforts to rebuild those foundations now face open hostility.

When public figures like Jordan Peterson face censure for reviving moral guidance once common in homes, churches, and civic life, it reveals something darker. Americans have lost access to the moral raw materials required to build a meaningful life.

Trump’s appeal never rested on personal virtue. It rested on his willingness to defend the institutions that make virtue possible. For millions of voters, he stood as a bulwark against moral collapse — not a saint but a protector of sacred ground. That’s what won him the loyalty of Americans disillusioned by the left’s assault on the moral structures they once relied upon.

The government’s job isn’t to redeem souls. It’s to safeguard the conditions under which people can pursue goodness, truth, and a flourishing life. That means defending the cultural space where moral frameworks can take root — and keeping vandals from tearing it apart.

Brooks calls this “narcissistic nihilism.” In reality, it’s something far rarer: hope — the hope that virtue can still grow in the soil that remains.

​David brooks, The atlantic, Donald trump, Virtue, Nihilism, Narcissism, The soul, Faith, Family, Tradition, Hope, Civic institutions, Decadence, Decline, America, Ideology, Christianity, Corruption, Administrative state, Deep state, Opinion & analysis 

A 32-year-old Florida male who had been out on bond after a 2023 incident during which he allegedly exposed his privates to a 13-year-old girl, masturbated, and said, ‘It’s big, isn’t it?” has been arrested after what authorities said was a similar incident this week.

What’s the background?

About a year and a half ago, Lauderhill police said a 13-year-old girl was walking to school when she said a male in a vehicle told her, “It’s big, isn’t it,” while he pleasured his exposed privates, WTVJ-TV reported.

Records show Davis remained in the Broward County jail Thursday afternoon.

The girl gave officers a description of the male, as well as his vehicle, and detectives identified the suspect as Travis Davis, officials told the station.

Detectives arrested Davis on charges of lewd and lascivious exhibition and indecent exposure of sexual organs, WTVJ said in a separate story, which added that police said they received additional calls from others describing similar accounts.

Prosecutors at the time said Davis admitted to driving around schools and approaching underage girls, WSVN-TV reported.

A judge ordered Davis to have no contact with minors and to stay at least 100 feet away from all public and private schools in the area, WSVN said. Records show Davis was released on bond while awaiting trial, WTVJ said.

Another accusation

A 16-year-old girl told Fort Lauderdale police that she was walking to school Monday morning near the 2100 block of Northwest 20th Street when a male in a gray Dodge Charger approached her at the intersection, WTVJ said.

The girl said the male rolled down his window, exposed his genitals, and made inappropriate gestures and movements before fleeing the scene, the station said.

Detectives later identified the male in question as Davis, and he was arrested Tuesday on charges of exposure of sexual organs (second offense) and violation of pretrial release, police added to WTVJ.

Records show Davis remained in the Broward County jail Thursday afternoon.

This story has been updated.

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

​Florida, Fort lauderdale, Police, Arrest, Repeat offender, Indecent exposure, Underage girls, Crime 

Comedian and actress Wanda Sykes said that white people should be embarrassed over the first 100 days of the second term of President Donald Trump.

Sykes made the comments while a guest on “The Late Show” after host Stephen Colbert asked her what she thought of the Signal debacle under Defense Dept. Secretary Pete Hegseth. She had previously worked as a procurement specialist at the National Security Agency.

‘You ain’t got no business being on Signal! Signal is for booty calls! That’s it! That’s it!’

“I have to say, white people, y’all should be embarrassed by this. You really should be. Y’all really need to do something, seriously. ‘Cuz this is embarrassing,” said Sykes.

“I know you’ll say, ‘Well, Wanda, why white people?’ Because we tried to tell y’all! We tried to tell ya’ll, and y’all didn’t want to listen, so now this is your problem,” she added.

“Black people are busy,” Sykes said to laughter from the audience. “We’re doing other stuff right now. Y’all gotta do it.”

Sykes also praised some of the protests against Trump but added that they needed to do more.

“And I’m so proud of you. I see you out there protesting. So keep up the good work, but now you got to amp it up. I need y’all to go back and look at some of our old protests and get some tips,” she continued.

“Black folks, we’re going to be right there behind you — not really,” she joked. “We’re not even going to be behind you. You know what? We’ll like your post, that’s what we’ll do.”

Sykes called the administration “embarrassing, incompetent, and corrupt.” She referred to her past employment in the government to criticize Hegseth for the controversy over Defense officials using Signal to discuss war plans against the Houthi terrorists.

“You ain’t got no business being on Signal!” she added. “Signal is for booty calls! That’s it! That’s it!”

The segment can be viewed on the video from “The Late Show” on YouTube.

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

​Wanda sykes vs trump, Wanda sykes hates trump, Sykes vs hegseth, Late show with stephen colbert, Politics 

President Donald Trump’s budget lays out plans to cut funding for several federal programs and services that incentivize illegal immigration, Blaze News has exclusively learned.

Illegal immigration was a focal point of Trump’s campaign and is now a focal point of his presidency. With border crossings now reaching record lows, Trump is aiming to defund the “invasion” altogether by cutting taxpayer programs his administration says incentivizes illegal immigration, according to a memo obtained exclusively by Blaze News. These include programs that de-emphasize the importance of the English language and provide special taxpayer-funded, liberally tinged education to illegal migrants.

The president’s budget is independent from the House and the Senate’s efforts and negotiations, but it serves as a signal and a blueprint for the White House’s priorities.

By eliminating these programs, Trump’s budget will actively disincentivize illegal immigration and simultaneously save Americans over $5.6 billion.

“President Trump is committed to eliminating the funding of our own invasion,” the memo, obtained by Blaze News, reads. “The President’s FY 2026 Budget fully funds a strong border, mass deportation, and stops the endless stream of benefits to illegal aliens given preference over American citizens.”

Trump’s budget would eliminate the English Language Acquisition program, which promotes “educational equity” and touts multilingualism as opposed to encouraging English as the United States’ primary language, according to the memo. Under former President Joe Biden’s administration, this program was used to fund education for illegal aliens while “simultaneously promoting divisive ideological indoctrination in the classroom.” Cutting this program alone would save the taxpayer $890 million.

Other “educational” programs on the chopping block include the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act grant program and the Migrant Education and Special Programs for Migrant Students, saving Americans $729 million and $428 million, respectively. These programs provide various educational services to illegal aliens, oftentimes encouraging “radical diversity, equity, and inclusion,” or DEI.

Trump’s budget would also eliminate the Department of Homeland Security Shelter and Services Program, which the White House charges “massively facilitated illegal migration” by providing transportation and shelter to illegal aliens in Democrat-run sanctuary cities and states, saving taxpayers $650 million. The budget would also eliminate another $3.5 billion in Migration and Refugee Assistance, which the Biden Department of State used to facilitate illegal migration on the premise of a “mostly bogus refugee status.”

By eliminating these programs, Trump’s budget would both actively disincentivize illegal immigration and simultaneously save Americans over $5.6 billion.

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

​Donald trump, Omb, Joe biden, Office of management and budget, Illegal immigration, Open border, Border crisis, Trump administration, Trump budget, Migrant programs, Sanctuary city, Border crossings, Federal spending, Doge, Illegal aliens, Refugee status, Politics