Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) condemned Rep. Max Miller (R-Ohio) on Sunday, characterizing him as a “danger” and calling for his resignation. Miller, who is running for re-election, has denied the allegations advanced by his ex-father-in-law and indicated that he will not scuttle his re-election campaign.

How it started

In May 2021, then-congressional candidate Miller got engaged to Emily Moreno, the daughter of then-Senate candidate Bernie Moreno. The lovers had met while working for Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s failed presidential campaign in 2015 and got married in a civil ceremony on Aug. 17, 2022.

‘I’m winning in November.’

In November 2023, the couple welcomed a daughter into the world, but by that time, their relationship was apparently already falling apart.

Miller — who years earlier was accused by ex-girlfriend and ex-White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham of physical abuse that the congressman’s lawyer said “never happened” — filed for divorce in August 2024. According to a court filing, Emily Moreno Miller had moved with their daughter into a house earlier that month that had been allegedly purchased by a company owned by Sen. Moreno.

As the divorce proceedings grew uglier, a spokeswoman for Sen. Moreno stressed that “it’s a private family matter” and the senator would not be making further comments.

The couple’s divorce was finalized last year. However, their custody battle raged on, and just recently, a leftist site dug up allegations from court filings that paint Miller in a particularly unflattering light.

RELATED: Mike Lee SOUNDS the ALARM after stunning polls from Senate race in Texas

Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Mother Jones, citing a trove of court filings and police reports obtained through public records requests, last month detailed allegations of verbal abuse by Miller as well as drug use and violent behavior against multiple individuals.

The leftist site highlighted records related to an investigation by Cuyahoga County’s Division of Child and Family Services into how the couple’s daughter ended up with a broken collar bone — an injury that was not proven to have been the result of abuse. The records reportedly show that Emily Moreno told the detectives investigating the broken bone that Miller allegedly threw hot water at her in June 2024, pushed her, and put a gun to her head.

Mother Jones acknowledged that “some of the accusations contained in the records have not been conclusively proven by a court or law enforcement agency,” and noted that Emily Moreno “never filed a police report against Miller for harm she says he inflicted on her.”

How it’s going

On Sunday morning, Miller — who sued Emily Moreno earlier this year for alleged defamation and suggested in a recent interview that his ex-wife has untreated bipolar disorder and “sadly isn’t all there” — shared a nearly 20-minute video to X where he not only rejects his characterization as an abusive husband and father but confronted and denied each of the key allegations raised against him.

Miller also made clear that he wasn’t dropping out: “I’m not getting out of this race, and I’m winning in November.”

The congressman concluded his video by emphasizing that he will “hold strong” and clear his name and urging skeptics to review the packet of court documents he also released on Sunday, which the congressman evidently regards as exculpatory.

‘I personally wouldn’t wait two years before holding him accountable.’

The summary accompanying the “evidence packet” claims that: “every abuse allegation that has been investigated has been resolved in Miller’s favor”; “Moreno’s own sworn and recorded statements directly contradict her abuse allegations,” including her October 2024 statement that Miller had never harmed their daughter; “no court has ever found that Miller abused anyone”; and in the “‘boiling water’ incident,” Miller had only sprayed his ex-wife with tap water from the sink sprayer.

Stefan Mychajliw, a spokesman for Emily Moreno, said in a statement, “It is shameful that Max Miller decided to go on a bizarre and lie-filled rant about his ex-wife to desperately try to save his political career. There is a documented trove of evidence that Miller has a history of violent and dangerous behavior and no amount of victim shaming will change that.”

“Miller can lie and spin on X, but he cannot do so under oath in a court of law,” added the spokesman. “We are confident that justice will prevail in court.”

Sen. Moreno, among those not buying what his former son-in-law is selling, penned a lengthy social media post on Sunday, stating, “As a father and husband, I can tell you the last two years have been pure hell for my wife Bridget, our daughter Emily, me, and our entire family in the aftermath of Emily’s divorce.”

“It has been horrific to watch this play out in full public view, all while knowing an innocent two-year-old girl is caught in the middle,” continued the senator. “Our priority has always been protecting our daughter and our granddaughter. Out of concern for the safety of my family, I hoped to keep this matter private but Max Miller’s increasingly erratic and dangerous behavior has made that impossible.”

Sen. Moreno noted further that “Max Miller needs serious psychological help. He is a danger to my daughter, and I hold my breath every minute he has custody of my granddaughter.”

According to the senator, Miller’s character is unbecoming of an elected official, and “he should not serve in the House of Representatives.”

Miller said in response to Sen. Moreno’s post, “If my daughter said the same thing to me, I personally wouldn’t wait two years before holding him accountable. You know this isn’t true and the only reason you are speaking out now is to hide from your own media circus. This is all political.”

When asked over the weekend whether Miller should resign, President Donald Trump — who previously endorsed him — said, “Well, I’m going to look at it. I mean so far it’s accusations.”

A poll conducted in late June had Miller leading Democratic challenger Brian Poindexter by only one percentage point.

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

​Max miller, Bernie moreno, Ohio, Republican, Politics 

Remember the radio? Of course you do. It’s not hard to remember. It’s still around. You can buy a little one on Amazon and tune into AM or FM. Cars still have them, for now. You can enjoy classical music on public radio, political commentary on talk radio, the game on a Friday night, or whatever else there is floating around on the airwaves at any given moment on any given day.

Before TikTok there was Facebook, and before Facebook there was MySpace, and before MySpace there was television, and before television there was radio, and before radio there was silence.

‘Who else is listening to this right now?’ That’s what I wonder a little when I’m driving and scanning the radio. There’s no way for me to know.

Imagine what that transition was like — from silence to radio.

Big world

I’ve been reading “Hello, Everybody! The Dawn of American Radio” by Anthony J. Rudel recently, and in it, Rudel writes at length about that time and transition from silence to radio sound.

The world was so big in those days. Rhode Island was so far from Spain, and Ohio was so far from Rhode Island. In that big world of people without Social Security numbers or anything like our panopticon of 2026, there were millions and millions of little worlds. Towns, blocks, clans, families, and people all in their own little worlds, living and breathing in silence.

Radio was, in some way, a beginning of the modern world as we know it. Of course, there have been many symbols of many beginnings in different and disparate domains, and radio was one of them. The ability to transmit a message across the land to anyone else who might want to listen was the beginning of mass communication and mass modern society. In hindsight, it was the first step in a long march toward Instagram, Facebook, and X.

When media was social

But radio was nothing like today’s social media. The people who listened to it still lived primarily in embodied communities — families, churches, neighborhoods, and workplaces. Radio expanded that world; it did not replace it.

Social media has done the opposite. Millions of us now inhabit synthetic networks populated by algorithms, bots, AI-generated content, and strangers selected by recommendation engines rather than real proximity. We are connected to more people than ever while becoming increasingly detached from the human beings physically around us.

Radio felt like a kind of modern magic. Voices traveled across the plains, through the night, and into your living room, making a vast country seem smaller. Yet those voices still pointed back toward a shared human world, answering one of humanity’s oldest questions: Is anybody out there?

Beautiful uncertainty

There’s something beautiful about how terrestrial radio isn’t completely predictable or reliable. Fishing, not knowing what you might catch when throwing your line in the water is like that. Driving and just letting the road go is like that. Tuning into the radio, passing over static as you turn the dial right, hearing faint music or voices covered by the gray sound, and landing on a station you haven’t heard before is like that.

Driving late at night with one hand on the wheel and the other on the dial, scanning from station to station, seeing if there is anything worth listening to is different from looking through Spotify playlists or flipping through CDs like we once did 20 years ago. Spotify playlists somehow feel like shopping at the store, and CDs felt like something private, while radio stations feel like something almost — almost! — communal.

“Who else is listening to this right now?” That’s what I wonder a little when I’m driving and scanning the radio. There’s no way for me to know. There’s no way for the radio station to know. There’s no way for anyone to know who’s listening in their car or in their bedroom or in their kitchen.

The sound is sent out into the world on a certain frequency, and those who are tuned in hear. There is no history of it marked, there is no documentation logged, there is no surveillance state knowing you listened that night. Ah, the sound of freedom.

RELATED: Goodbye, car radio? Big Tech’s plans to control what you listen to behind the wheel.

Ron Schwerin/Getty Images

Batter up

Maybe it’s nostalgia, or maybe it’s aesthetics, but whatever it is, there is something so damn American about listening to a baseball game on the radio. The game sounds better over a little tinny speaker with crackle and static than it looks on a 96-inch flatscreen. The way the announcers sound, the way they describe every detail, the distant cry of the crowd in the background. You imagine sight in your mind behind your eyes as you play out what they tell you.

Maybe the beauty of radio is the fact that we don’t have control once we finally land on a station that’s clear. Someone else chooses the music to play or the words to say, and it’s there in the background, and everyone out there who’s listening listens. Maybe it’s good, maybe it’s bad, maybe it’s all right, but it’s just what there is, and it’s fine. I think we might get sick of making so many choices these days. There’s too many choices. Going on a ride with someone else is nicer than driving ourselves.

If all this is just nostalgia, then it’s a nostalgia for a world that hadn’t quite yet evolved, or rather devolved, into the global cyber panopticon we have today. It was a world teetering on the edge of technological modernity; one still with the magic of the old little worlds; one that was peering over the fence toward the future and everyone else far away. It was a big world out there, and we could only hear just a little of it.

It was tinny, scratchy, and it was magical.

​Community, Culture, Lifestyle, Radio, Social media, The root of the matter, Baseball 

The left suddenly fears that artificial intelligence will replace American workers. It showed far less concern when illegal immigration undercut wages and jobs.

The double standard reveals a larger economic vision: protection for the credentialed class, cheap labor at the bottom, and little concern for the working Americans caught between them.

The left has built a bifurcated economy because it has bifurcated loyalties. Neither side of that arrangement puts America’s working class first.

Progressive warnings about AI often begin with the claim that employers will use new technology to replace costly labor or avoid training new employees. One progressive platform warns that AI could cause massive labor-market disruption. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) proposes taxing AI so that its gains do not flow only to the wealthy.

The concern isn’t inherently foolish. New technology can displace workers, at least temporarily, and policymakers should consider how people adapt. But the left’s labor solidarity becomes strangely selective when the competing worker entered the country illegally.

The Migration Policy Institute recently estimated that the illegal immigrant population may have reached 15.8 million. The Biden years also produced more than 10 million border encounters, although that figure includes repeat attempts and excludes people who evaded detection.

Meanwhile, the July Bureau of Labor Statistics report counted 7.1 million unemployed Americans. Those numbers do not prove that every illegal worker displaced a citizen. They do make it absurd to pretend that millions of additional workers have no effect on wages, bargaining power, or employment.

The standard answer is that illegal immigrants perform jobs Americans refuse to do. Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) put the argument plainly: In a capitalist economy, someone will always do the work others do not want.

But jobs are not fixed objects with permanently assigned wages. When employers cannot attract workers, they must raise pay, improve conditions, invest in equipment, or change the way the work is performed. Labor scarcity gives workers leverage.

Progressives claim to understand that principle when they campaign for higher legal wage floors. The five states with the highest minimum wages are deep blue. Democratic lawmakers routinely demand “living wages” and stronger benefits.

RELATED: The bipartisan farm bill that also grows amnesty

Wenmei Zhou/iStock/Getty Images

Yet the same politicians short-circuit the market mechanism that might raise wages naturally. They permit a large supply of unauthorized labor, including an estimated 8.5 million people working off the books, to fill jobs at wages and under conditions many would never accept.

That arrangement is not compassionate to workers. It allows employers to avoid the higher pay, benefits, and taxes that legal labor would require. It also leaves illegal immigrants vulnerable to exploitation because their status limits their ability to challenge abuse.

The result is a two-tiered labor market.

At the top sit credentialed professionals whose jobs may be threatened by AI. Their anxieties receive white papers, Senate hearings, tax proposals, and sympathetic coverage. At the bottom sit unauthorized workers whom progressive politicians describe as indispensable because they perform society’s least desirable tasks.

Crockett’s own words and similar comments from other Democrats expose the hierarchy. The jobs at the top must be protected from technological competition. The jobs at the bottom must remain cheap enough that Americans supposedly will not take them.

The people excluded from both priorities are working-class citizens.

They are told that automation may eliminate their better-paying opportunities but that low-wage jobs cannot pay more because imported labor must fill them. They face high legal wage mandates and benefit requirements on one side, then competition from off-the-books labor on the other.

Government benefits without strong work requirements can compound the problem by creating a steep penalty for returning to employment. Sanctuary policies then protect the unauthorized labor supply that keeps wages down.

RELATED: Unaffordable housing is still ruining the party

Cemile Bingol/iStock/Getty Images

This is not a coherent defense of workers. It is a coalition strategy.

The modern left protects the professional class that staffs its institutions and the immigrant constituencies it hopes to mobilize. The blue-collar Americans who once formed the Democratic base receive speeches about dignity while policy steadily erodes their bargaining power.

Long gone are the days when the left at least pretended to organize politics around the American worker.

AI may indeed disrupt employment. Illegal immigration can also depress wages and displace workers. A party genuinely committed to labor would confront both pressures honestly instead of treating one as a crisis and the other as a moral obligation.

The left has built a bifurcated economy because it has bifurcated loyalties. Neither side of that arrangement puts America’s working class first.

​Artificial intelligence, Illegal immigration, Labor, Wages, Unemployment, Elizabeth warren, Jasmine crockett, Big tech, White collar, Working class, Living wage, Opinion & analysis 

Nick Shirley — the 24-year-old investigative journalist who exposed the shocking depths of alleged day care and social services fraud in Minnesota’s Somali community — has now turned his gaze to another growing issue in America: the rise of communism.

While there are people of all ages and backgrounds who embrace communism, the system that seeks to erase freedom and equalize misery is especially popular among Gen Z.

On this episode of “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered,” Sara plays a viral clip from Shirley capturing a young woman arguing in favor of abolishing prisons — even if that means her rapist is allowed to freely roam the streets.

In the video, the woman admits that she is “pro-communism,” including “getting rid of prisons.”

When Shirley pressed her on why she feels prisons need to be abolished, she argued they are not beneficial for society.

“The system of criminality is a very strange way to interact with, like, I guess, humanity in general, and like things that as a species we’re not interested in, like, perpetuating. I think it’s kind of backwards, and so I’m not certain what prisons are actually doing for our society,” she said.

When Shirley asked her if she’d prefer “to have criminals out in the open,” her answer was a shocking yes.

“Sure, I’m fine with that because the idea of a ‘criminal’ is, like, a little bit funny to me,” she said.

“Let’s just say somebody who has raped a woman — would you like them to be out in the street?” Shirley asked.

“I think my answer is yes, even though that’s a challenging answer to say,” she replied.

Shirley then asked if she felt the same way if she were the woman who had been raped.

“I have been raped, and they are out in the street, and I’m not sure, like, them going to jail is a solution to, like, whatever is going on inside their heart or even my own heart that, like, contributed to that experience that I’m having,” she said. “And I don’t want more people to get raped, but I don’t know for certain that going into a jail in the United States is going to shift anything inside of their, like, operating system so that they’ll make a different choice again.”

Sara is baffled by Shirley’s exchange with the young communism supporter and fears a future where people with these destructive worldviews begin taking positions of power in society.

“These people are going to be CEOs, I guess, someday,” she says.

To see the viral footage, plus another shocking clip where a young man admits on camera he has a job but fraudulently collects food stamps and other benefits, watch the video above.

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.

​Sara gonzales, Nick shirley, Communism, Gen z, Blazetv show 

Fox News political analyst Guy Benson is receiving congratulations from across conservative media after announcing the birth of his daughter, Madison Halsey.

“She’s here, and she’s perfect,” Benson wrote in a post that quickly racked up more than 10,000 likes.

“We are blessed and overjoyed to welcome Madison Halsey into the world and into our family. Our hearts are filled to the brim. A baby girl. We are just so thankful.”

However, BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey doesn’t share his excitement.

“You’ve heard my spiel on surrogacy a lot, but when we create these children, especially in this situation where you are buying the eggs from one woman, you are renting the womb from another woman,” she says.

“So you’re taking a child away from their biological mother, you are placing them in an unrelated woman whose smell and touch and heartbeat and body they get to know, they call home for nine months,” she continues.

“And then you immediately take that child after birth away from the only home, the only smell, the only regulator, the only woman they have ever known and away from the biological mom with whom they share half of their DNA. We are treating that child worse than we treat kittens and puppies,” she adds.

For kittens and puppies, the natural bond between a mother and her litter is respected.

“But for some reason, when it comes to human babies who are much more fragile, who are much less resilient, and of course as Christians, we believe are made in God’s image and so matter infinitely more than a cat or a dog, we say, ‘Eh, it’s probably fine,’” Stuckey says.

“It is the prioritization of adult wants over children’s needs,” she adds.

But it’s not just purposely taking children away from their biological mother that bothers Stuckey, noting that the entire process has “physical consequences for the child.”

“It’s much more risky for the embryo. It’s much more risky, or riskier, for the baby as well during conception, during transfer and implantation, during gestation,” she explains.

“But then of course, you’re creating this emotional and psychological, physiological risk too,” she continues, before playing a TikTok video of a man in a homosexual relationship claiming his son cries for his “mommy” despite never knowing his mother.

“This is very common. This is natural. This is instinctive. Somewhere deep inside, we want to know where we came from. We want our mom. That does not mean that two men who are raising a child don’t love their child,” she says.

“It means that they’re not a mom. You can be a really good dad, but you will never be a mom,” she adds.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

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

​Allie beth stuckey, Christians, Fox news, Guy benson, Surrogacy, Blazetv show, Lgbt 

Jimmy Carter did more damage to American foreign policy in one weekend than most diplomats manage in a career.

In June 1994, President Bill Clinton sent Carter (no relation) to Pyongyang as a private citizen, with no authority to negotiate or speak for the U.S. government. Two days later, Carter cut a deal anyway. Then he called CNN before he called the White House. Clinton learned that his own North Korea policy had changed by watching television.

Fleitz has written the best kind of policy book: one grounded in the record, animated by firsthand knowledge, and confident enough to let readers reach the obvious conclusion.

That episode, recounted on page 34 of Frederick H. Fleitz’s new book, “North Korea, Nuclear Brinkmanship, and the Oval Office,” makes up the best two pages in the book. It also contains the clearest explanation of why the book deserves attention.

Fleitz spent more than two decades inside the machinery of American national security policy — at the CIA, State Department, House Intelligence Committee, and National Security Council. He was in the room, or close enough to it, for much of what he describes. This is not a book assembled from newspaper clippings. Fleitz names names, places officials on opposing sides of consequential fights, and lets the record judge them.

The Carter episode establishes the pattern Fleitz traces across three decades. North Korea manufactures a crisis. Washington sends someone to talk. Pyongyang extracts a concession. The concession is celebrated as a “breakthrough.” North Korea breaks the agreement once the cameras leave. Then the cycle begins again.

Why did it continue under presidents of both parties? Because it worked.

Fleitz does not spare the Clinton administration. He describes the 1994 Agreed Framework — the deal Carter set in motion — as a bad bargain from the start. The administration called it a “framework” rather than an “agreement,” he argues, to avoid the Senate ratification a treaty would have required. Pyongyang received two light-water reactors and years of fuel oil. Washington received a promise to surrender spent fuel rods that never arrived.

The Bush years receive the same treatment. Fleitz recounts envoy Chris Hill dismissing intelligence about North Korea’s secret uranium-enrichment program. Dick Cheney later told journalist James Rosen that Hill was “deceitful, perfectly prepared to lie to the president.” Hill’s reply — “I’m not Richard Nixon” — is the kind of detail that makes an insider’s account worth reading.

RELATED: Nukes by the numbers: A problem we can’t wish away

Kim Jae-Hwan/SOPA Images/LightRocket/Getty Images

Fleitz is writing about policy, but he understands that policy is made by people with ambitions, loyalties, grudges, and blind spots. His book is not a dry institutional history. It is a fight among real officials over real consequences.

The 2007 destruction of Syria’s North Korean-built reactor at al-Kibar receives similarly careful treatment. Fleitz reports that the Bush administration tried to keep Israel’s strike hidden from Congress — a detail that reveals as much about Washington’s instinct for secrecy as it does about North Korea’s proliferation network.

The Trump chapters give the book its greatest energy because Fleitz supports his case with numbers rather than adjectives. North Korea tested no missiles in 2018, only a handful of short-range missiles in 2019, and no intercontinental ballistic missiles until 2022. That year, under President Joe Biden, North Korea set a single-year record of roughly 165 missile launches.

Fleitz also details the February 2018 sanctions package, the toughest imposed on Pyongyang to that point, and Trump’s warning that “phase two” could become “very, very rough” if sanctions failed. Whatever one thinks of the rhetoric, it reads as the voice of a president wielding leverage rather than asking politely for cooperation.

Fleitz states his central conclusion plainly: North Korea respects strength and exploits weakness.

In his telling, every bad deal in the book was struck when an American president negotiated from a position of distraction, exhaustion, or political vulnerability: the 1994 Agreed Framework under Clinton, the near-deal at the end of George W. Bush’s second term, the Iran nuclear agreement under Barack Obama, and a reported secret arrangement with Iran under Biden.

The one moment Pyongyang backed off and came to the table, Fleitz argues, came in 2018, when the regime confronted a president threatening its destruction rather than pleading for another agreement.

RELATED: The future of warfare is not what you think

STR/KCNA/KNS/AFP/Getty Images

That thesis will invite argument, as it should. Trump did not eliminate North Korea’s nuclear arsenal, and the regime remains dangerous. But Fleitz makes a persuasive case that pressure created negotiating space while accommodation repeatedly rewarded bad behavior.

The lesson extends beyond North Korea. China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran are drawing closer. Washington still faces the temptation to mistake talks for progress, signatures for compliance, and diplomatic activity for strategic success.

For that reason, “North Korea, Nuclear Brinkmanship, and the Oval Office” is not merely a history of failed negotiations. It is a warning about a pattern that American policymakers keep repeating.

Fleitz has written the best kind of policy book: one grounded in the record, animated by firsthand knowledge, and confident enough to let readers examine the evidence and reach the obvious conclusion. Weakness does not moderate regimes such as North Korea. It teaches them what they can take next.

​Bill clinton, Dick cheney, Jimmy carter, Opinion & analysis, State department, Joe biden, Donald trump, George w. bush, North korea, Nuclear weapons, Diplomacy, Kim jong un, Frederick fleitz, America first, Foreign policy 

Generative AI has gained all kinds of new skills over the years, one of which is permanence, or the ability to remember details from past conversations. These days, your favorite AI platform may know a lot about you, such as your occupation, hobbies, and likes/dislikes. But what would happen if your AI chatbot had its memory hijacked to steal your data? That’s exactly what can happen with this latest fatal flaw that was discovered in some AI platforms.

This concerning trick was first uncovered by a research team at New Mexico State University. Dubbed GhostWriter, it has the ability to use hidden prompts to carry out tasks without the user’s knowledge. These can be innocuous, like capturing information currently saved in the clipboard on your device, or they can be malicious, like logging into your bank account and routing funds to an external bank, as well as stealing files, passwords, and other personal information.

It lies dormant for weeks, months, or even years.

According to the researchers, GhostWriter works in two stages:

First, it requires a prompt injection, where the attacker leaves a command for the AI to carry out a specific task when the user writes an unrelated prompt. In this case, the attacker could tell the AI to look for its user to type a certain keyword or phrase to trigger the hidden command. The second stage is activation. In this phase, the user unknowingly initiates the GhostWriter command, prompting the AI agent to carry out the intentional task the user requested, as well as the hidden task the attacker requested. At this point, the AI completes both tasks as instructed.

From the AI agent’s point of view, the tasks were both valid commands, and it will complete them to the best of its ability. From the user’s point of view, he often won’t know that a secondary task was carried out on his device, leaving him unaware of any malicious activity connected to his account. And for the attacker, he receives the stolen data with little fanfare.

RELATED: Protect yourself now from Apple’s latest privacy fail

itsarasak thithuekthak/Getty Images

What makes GhostWriter especially dangerous is that it’s not a virus or a hack in itself. It’s simply a tweak to the AI’s memory — a simple hidden command to do something its original user didn’t intend for it to do, nor could the user know to issue his own command to stop the act.

GhostWriter is also persistent, meaning that it can’t be overridden or erased as long as the potential victim is unaware it exists. Instead, it lies dormant for weeks, months, or even years until the right user prompt triggers the command that causes the malicious activity to be carried out.

Now, the good news

If there’s any silver lining, it’s the fact that GhostWriter largely affects agentic AI, or agents. Most AI platforms on the market today — including ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Grok — are all simple chatbots that require human input to carry out tasks. That means for most casual users, GhostWriter shouldn’t pose a threat to their personal information.

That said, while AI agents are still quite rare, many of the top AI companies in the world are scrambling to build functional versions to carry out work projects, complete personal tasks, and more. NVIDIA, a hardware leader in the space, wishes to outfit companies with enterprise AI that can work alongside (and even replace) human employees. Then there’s Google, which wants to load an agentic version of Gemini into Android devices called Gemini Intelligence. Although agents are scarce today, all the major AI platforms are working hard to make agents ubiquitous in the next five years or less.

As for those who do rely on agentic AI today, the New Mexico State University researchers believe that Agentic Memory Sentry, a defense system that uses refined memory saving and retrieval mechanisms to lower the likelihood of a successful GhostWriter attack, is the best way to thwart potential attacks, though even this method isn’t perfect yet. Ultimately, users will either have to trust agentic AI with these built-in risks, or avoid it altogether. I know which option I’ll pick.

​Tech, Security, Ai, Data, Privacy 

As anti-Jewish rhetoric gains traction in some corners of the political right, BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey says the church can no longer afford to stay silent about what she calls “Israel derangement syndrome.”

“The Israel derangement syndrome, the Jewish derangement syndrome that has infected the minds of so many people, that they see Jewish people behind every closed door, that they’re behind every conspiracy, that they’re pulling the strings of power in every single direction, and that everything, somehow every tragedy, every injustice comes back to Israel, that is just beyond the pale,” Stuckey says.

“That is beyond logic. That is beyond reason. I think that there is something spiritual there because we see that same pattern over and over again in so many cultures throughout history and that is anti-Christian,” she continues.

This “Jewish derangement syndrome,” Stuckey says, has “blinded them to reality.”

“Scripture gives us no reason whatsoever to sever Christianity from its Jewish roots. Jesus came as Israel’s Messiah, the fulfillment of the law and the prophets. And the gospel came, according to Romans 1:16, to the Jew first and also to the Greek,” she explains.

“Christianity, it is absolutely true and inarguable, is rooted in God’s covenant with Israel, which Christ fulfilled,” she continues.

“Jesus was born under the Jewish law given to Moses in the Old Testament and came to those who were under the law, to Jews. That was His primary mission field. That’s what He reiterated over and over again,” she adds.

What those with “Israel derangement syndrome” are attempting to do is separate Christianity from Judaism when the Bible makes clear that it’s impossible.

“You cannot when you serve a Jewish savior and a God who does not go back on His promises,” Stuckey says.

“One plan of salvation through Jesus Christ for Jews and Gentiles and every single person. That does not negate the very real Jewish context, Jewish history, Jewish principles that are shared because of the biblical canon, because of the history of who God actually is,” she explains.

Stuckey also points out that many detractors claim that we don’t have Judeo-Christian roots because our founding fathers were not Jewish.

“A lot of the people I see saying that are what you call ‘trad Cath.’ A lot of the people I see pushing back against this Judeo-Christian terminology moniker are Catholic themselves. So if we are going to say we can’t call it Judeo-Christian because the founders weren’t Jewish … we’re also not going to call it Catholic Christian because the founders weren’t Catholic,” she says.

“When people are saying Judeo-Christian, they’re not saying that some of the founders were Jewish. They were saying, ‘We have these shared principles of people being made by a God whose power and knowledge transcends ours,’” she adds.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

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

​Allie beth stuckey, Founding fathers, Israel, Jesus, Christianity, Judeo-christian, Blazetv show