I’m a huge basketball fan. I grew up watching the NBA, arguing about players who retired before I was born, and wasting hours on a no-look pass nobody had asked for. But if basketball is a passion, soccer is something deeper.

I have supported Manchester United since I was old enough to go to the bathroom unsupervised. My father, meanwhile, is a diehard Liverpool supporter. Growing up, our house was less a home and more a demilitarized zone. United against Liverpool was the closest my family came to civil war. If United won, I floated around the house for days. If Liverpool won, my father suddenly became the world’s most insufferable human being.

That rivalry taught me why soccer is special. Half the beauty of soccer is the madness. The missed chances. The terrible refereeing decisions. The goalkeeper who slips at the worst possible moment. The defender who accidentally turns a routine clearance into an own goal.

Perhaps when it’s too late, you realize perfection is often sterile.

Human error is a part of the beautiful game.

For most of soccer’s history, fans accepted that referees would occasionally get things wrong. Sometimes those mistakes hurt. Sometimes they helped. Sometimes they became legendary stories repeated decades later in pubs, living rooms, and stadium parking lots. Then came VAR.

From helper to master

For anyone unfamiliar, VAR stands for video assistant referee. In simple terms, it is soccer’s version of instant replay on AI-infused steroids. A team of officials watches the game through cameras and can tell the referee to stop play and review decisions involving goals, penalties, red cards, and offside calls.

The idea sounds reasonable enough. Use technology to make the game fairer.

The reality has been something rather different.

A striker scores. The crowd erupts. Fans hug strangers. Drinks fly through the air. Somewhere, a man loses his glasses and another loses his mind. Then everyone waits. And waits. And waits.

A group of officials in a room filled with screens begin examining freeze-frames as if they were analyzing evidence from a murder investigation. Lines appear on the screen. Angles are checked. Pixels are interrogated. The striker’s left nostril may have wandered two millimeters beyond the last defender.

Two minutes later, the goal is disallowed. The stadium goes silent. What was once one of the most emotional moments in sports now comes with a mandatory waiting period. Every goal feels like it must survive an IRS audit before it can officially exist. VAR arrived to correct errors and corrected the joy out of the game instead.

RELATED: Top companies admit humans cost less than AI — but still want more bots

L-R: Chris Ratcliffe/Bloomberg/Getty Images; Timothy Hurst/MediaNews Group/Denver Post/Getty Images

The suspense is gone. The spontaneity is gone. Fans now celebrate goals with the enthusiasm of someone waiting for a bank transfer to clear. Nobody knows whether they should cheer immediately or wait for the algorithmic overlords in the replay bunker to issue a ruling.

And now something similar may be coming to basketball.

Like clockwork

NBA Commissioner Adam Silver recently discussed plans to use AI-powered camera systems to automatically make certain officiating decisions, particularly objective calls like out-of-bounds plays. Cameras would surround the court, instantly determining who touched the ball last.

Many will argue that this will eliminate mistakes. Maybe. But sports are rarely damaged by too much humanity. If anything, they are usually damaged by too little. The danger isn’t that AI gets calls wrong, but that it gradually turns the game into a laboratory experiment in which every action is measured, verified, and approved by machines.

Today, it’s out-of-bounds calls. Tomorrow, it’s automatic travel violations. Next year? AI-generated foul probabilities. A few years after that, an algorithm to calculate whether a defender’s facial expression suggested illegal contact. At some point, the referee becomes less an official and more a highly paid hall monitor standing near a very expensive computer.

Basketball fans should pay attention, because technology rarely arrives with a modest appetite. Name one piece of tech that hasn’t colonized everything around it. Even something that began as small as a step counter now grades how you sleep. VAR will not be the exception.

The NBA undoubtedly has officiating problems. Every fan knows it. Every playoff game seems to produce a new controversy. But there’s a real difference between improving officiating and outsourcing the soul of the game.

Sports are compelling because humans play them and humans judge them. Players make mistakes. Coaches make mistakes. Referees make mistakes. Fans make mistakes too. I once bet a ridiculous sum on a United academy prospect I was sure would be the next Ronaldo. Last I checked, he was playing for a third-tier side somewhere in East Asia.

Perfection sounds appealing. Then one day, perhaps when it’s too late, you realize perfection is often sterile. This risk, now facing soccer and basketball, ultimately menaces all our sports. In our obsession with eliminating every error, we seem bent on eliminating everything that makes sports feel alive: all its unpredictable moments. Arguments, controversies, the stories people remember for decades.

Yes, once every decision is handed to a machine, the games may become more accurate. They will also become a lot less interesting, because they’ll be so much less human.

To me, at least, a world where nobody can scream at the referee from the couch hardly sounds like progress at all.

​Tech 

A 12-year-old boy and his 11-year-old sister were traumatized by two thugs who robbed their lemonade stand after threatening them with a gun, according to the kids’ father.

David Byrne said his two children were selling lemonade in their south Boston neighborhood when they were approached by two juveniles at 4:40 p.m. on Wednesday.

‘This is appalling; this is grotesque. This is something that should not happen to young kids.’

The juveniles said they wanted to buy lemonade but walked away after claiming they didn’t have any money. A few minutes later they returned, and one flashed a black gun in his waistband.

“My kids immediately just put their hands up and said, ‘Take whatever you want.’ So, I’m proud of my kids for that, and I’m proud of them for basically protecting each other but also being smart in that bad situation,” Byrne said to WBZ-TV.

The juveniles allegedly took all of the cash that the children had earned and fled on foot.

“This is appalling; this is grotesque. This is something that should not happen to young kids,” the father said to WHDH-TV.

“Can’t have a gun and can’t be robbing lemonade stands. It’s as easy as that,” he added.

He went on to say that the children were sad and a little bit disturbed by what happened.

Boston police said they were searching for the juveniles and that no arrests had been made. They did release video and images of suspects they believed to be the juveniles responsible for the armed robbery.

RELATED: Video captures man walking up to kids’ lemonade stand and running away after snatching their money

Boston Police Dept.

Residents of the neighborhood expressed their shock at the incident.

“It’s awful and scary and definitely something you don’t want to come home to after a night. It’s disappointing. I didn’t expect it on our street,” Suzanna Ruotolo said.

RELATED: Sponsor pulls out of Boise Pride Festival after outrage over ‘Drag Kid’ show with children as young as 11 years old

Boston City Councilor Ed Flynn said the residents were getting together to make sure the lemonade stand would reopen with the support of the community.

“Let’s show them how much love and support the Southie community has for them. It is also our understanding that 50% of proceeds will be donated to a local organization working to prevent gun violence,” Flynn said.

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

​Lemonade stand, Armed robbery, Boston, Juvenile crime, Crime 

“Accuracy comes before speed.” That was California Secretary of State Shirley Weber’s message to voters in a press release issued two days after officials began counting ballots from June’s primary. In the same release, she reminded voters that the count could continue for up to 30 days after Election Day.

Weber argued that California is “taking the time to do this work correctly” to protect voters’ rights and ensure election integrity.

After 2022, 2024, and this year’s primary, the problem no longer looks like a glitch. It looks like a pattern created by poor policy choices.

She is right about one thing: Accuracy matters.

Every lawful ballot should be counted. Every voter should be confident that election officials will get the count right.

But a week after Election Day, California was still processing 1.4 million ballots under a system that routinely extends vote counting for days and sometimes weeks after voters cast their ballots.

That raises a question California’s leaders seem increasingly unwilling to answer: Why are voters repeatedly told they must choose between accurate elections and timely results?

This is not the first time California has found itself in this mess.

In 2022, several California congressional races remained unresolved long after Election Day while control of the U.S. House hung in limbo. Two years later, California took 38 days to certify its election results. Now in 2026, Californians are again waiting weeks after Election Day for final results.

The details change. The outcome does not. Californians keep waiting.

So why does this keep happening?

The answer starts with California election law. According to CalMatters, the delay is due in part to policies California adopted to make voting easier after the COVID-19 pandemic: Every registered voter receives a mail ballot, and ballots remain valid as long as they are postmarked by Election Day and arrive at county elections offices within seven days.

Election law expert Hans von Spakovsky has argued that California’s slow vote count is not an isolated incident or unexpected complication. It is the way the state’s election system is designed.

RELATED: ‘Fraudster’s paradise’: Feds plan to file election fraud charges in California

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

In other words, California is not experiencing an unexpected delay. It is experiencing the predictable results of the laws it chose.

Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) helped cement those policies in 2021 when he signed AB 37, making universal vote by mail permanent. His office promoted the law as “landmark elections legislation” that would expand vote by mail and strengthen election integrity.

Yet, Californians are now being sold the idea that waiting days or weeks for election results is simply the reality of modern elections.

It is not. It is the reality of California elections.

Timely results are part of election integrity. The longer ballots remain uncounted, the longer election officials must maintain secure chains of custody, verification systems, and storage. Delay does not automatically mean fraud. But delay does create more opportunities for confusion, suspicion, and avoidable controversy.

If California leaders want faster results, they should examine the policies that slow them down.

Instead, voters are told these delays are the unavoidable cost of administering elections in a large state. That explanation falls apart under scrutiny.

Look at Florida. The 2000 presidential election exposed serious weaknesses in that state’s election system. Legislators responded by reforming the state’s election administration and ballot-processing procedures.

Today, Florida is one of the fastest states in the country to report election results.

Florida allows election officials to begin processing mail ballots before Election Day, giving counties a head start on verification. The state also requires most mail ballots to be received by Election Day rather than days afterward. Voters whose signatures are missing or do not match generally have a much shorter window to fix those problems than California voters do.

Florida proves that accuracy and speed are not mutually exclusive.

California has chosen a different approach.

This is about more than administrative efficiency. In five months, Californians will return to the polls for the midterm election. Voters deserve confidence that the results will be accurate. They also deserve confidence that those results will arrive on time.

RELATED: Homeless people on Skid Row claim they were paid to vote — and not for Spencer Pratt

Mel Melcon/Los Angeles Times/Getty Images

Lawmakers should examine whether ballots should continue arriving after Election Day and still be counted. They should review whether lengthy ballot-curing timelines help voters or simply extend uncertainty. Election officials should also receive every opportunity to process ballots before Election Day so results can be reported faster once polls close.

Most important, California leaders should stop pretending accuracy and speed are enemies. Florida proves they are not.

Weber says accuracy comes before speed. California voters should ask why they cannot have both.

After 2022, 2024, and this year’s primary, the problem no longer looks like a glitch. It looks like a pattern created by poor policy choices.

California built an election process that can take a month after Election Day to resolve.

Voters should stop accepting that as normal.

​Accuracy, Ballots, California, Confidence, Election day, Florida, Primary, Secretary of state, Speed, Voters, Shirley weber, Fraud, Gavin newsom, Elections, Hans von spakovsky, Mail, Karen bass, Spencer pratt, Steve hilton, Los angeles, Tom steyer, Xavier becerra, Justice department, Investigation, Opinion & analysis 

The only things certain in life are death, taxes, and the permanence of a government program. But what happens when a private company turns its agenda into a government program?

You cannot build a more financially secure business model than permanence. That helps explain why OpenAI is now reportedly in discussions with the Trump administration about a possible public equity stake in the company.

Unlike the dot-com bubble, whose infrastructure later supported real economic growth, rotting data centers will not leave behind comparable public value.

After all, what else is a company with $1.4 trillion in obligations and only $14 billion in revenue supposed to do?

Why was OpenAI CEO Sam Altman on Capitol Hill last week? According to the Financial Times, he was effectively selling Americans the rope to hang themselves. The plan proposed by OpenAI and other companies would reportedly create a sovereign-wealth-style fund into which AI companies would contribute equity so that the public could share in the sector’s soaring valuations.

That sounds generous until one remembers that this is still a loss-making sector built on staggering capital demands.

What is the rationale? Asked about equity stakes on Air Force One, President Trump suggested that “pieces” of AI companies could be “given to the American public” to quell growing alarm over the rapid rollout of the technology.

In other words, Americans are being asked to surrender farmland, neighborhood continuity, and the reliability of the electric grid to cloud-based, surveillance-enabling chatslop. In return, they may receive the honor of owning the losses from an insolvent business model.

The president confirmed the idea at a press conference on Wednesday, saying he would soon meet with “the top 12 or 15 executives” about “giving back something to the public.” He promised that “the public will become very rich.”

That promise should terrify everyone.

Once generative AI becomes a public project, the industry will move beyond “too big to fail.” Whatever happens to the companies or the broader sector, their success will become artificially and inextricably tied to the economy. Every government favor, subsidy, guarantee, and bailout will then be justified as necessary to protect the public’s stake.

RELATED: The AI boom is turning public meetings into crime scenes

Natalie Behring/Getty Images

Last November, OpenAI’s chief financial officer let the cat out of the bag when she said the company would need the government as a “backstop” for its business model. Sarah Friar later denied seeking a bailout. But a leaked 11-page letter from OpenAI to the Office of Science and Technology Policy urged the government to provide “grants, cost-sharing agreements, loans, or loan guarantees” to build America’s AI industrial base — all, naturally, to “compete with China.”

Fast-forward six months, and “backstop” now appears to mean a public “stake” in the company.

Everyone knows OpenAI’s generative AI model is unsustainable. It is built on unfathomably expensive capital expenditures for every token of AI usage.

Companies such as JPMorgan are reportedly finding that employees, after being pushed to use generative AI platforms such as ChatGPT and Claude, are spending more on tokens than their individual salaries. Uber’s chief technology officer said last month that the company burned through its entire 2026 budget for Claude Code and Cursor in just four months. In the irony of ironies, Microsoft itself reportedly told engineers in a major division to stop using an AI coding tool because the cost-to-utility ratio was not there.

The reality is that AI would work better through localized edge computing with low latency than through cloud-based hyperscale data centers that require unsustainable amounts of land, capital, resources, and power while causing other harms. China is producing cheap open-source AI. America is pouring concrete.

But the scale of that concrete — and all the materials, inputs, and power needed to support it — is unsustainable. Everyone knows it. Google, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, and Oracle issued 47% more debt in the first five months of this year than they did from 2020 through 2024 combined. Total spending per capita now exceeds spending on the railroads in 1859, which at least served a clear public need that could be monetized over time.

RELATED: After fierce debate, Trump opts for federal controls in AI development

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP/Getty Images

There is no amount of monthly household or business subscription fees that will make this investment break even. The costs will only increase because the model depends on a resource-stripping industrial footprint and GPUs that have few other useful functions and depreciate within a few years.

Unlike the dot-com bubble, whose infrastructure later supported real economic growth, rotting data centers will not leave behind comparable public value.

The tech companies, land developers, and venture capital firms understand that this is a Ponzi scheme. They are racing to take these companies public so that they can be folded into indexes, ensuring that trillions in pension funds are funneled into an unsustainable business model. Once that happens, even if a more efficient approach to AI becomes obvious, the economy and government will already be too dependent on the data center model to let it fail.

That is why these companies are also seeking federal land for their projects, a favor not extended to ordinary industries. SoftBank, the Japanese investment company trying to underwrite much of OpenAI’s speculative build-out, is reportedly pushing for a federal land project in Ohio to reduce costs. But banks are already balking at these ventures after SoftBank failed to secure a $6 billion loan for OpenAI.

Green energy taught us a simple lesson: When the only path to profitability runs through government favors, we should not start down that path.

OpenAI does not need a public stake. It needs public skepticism.

Americans should not be asked to subsidize a speculative industry, sacrifice land and power, and then call the bailout wealth creation. If AI companies cannot survive without government backstops, loan guarantees, public land, and pension-fund capture, then they are not building the future.

They are building the next permanent government program.

​Amazon, Artificial intelligence, Bailout, Chatgpt, China, Claude, Data centers, Debt, Economic growth, Electricity, Google, Grants, Loans, Meta, Microsoft, Openai, Opinion & analysis, Oracle, Ownership, Public property, Sam altman, Socialism, Softbank 

As election integrity debates continue to rage across California, Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck believes state leaders are making a dangerous mistake: treating skepticism as a threat instead of addressing the concerns behind it.

“What’s happening in California is dangerous, and … if you can be reasonable and you can listen without the lens of your tribe, there is a way to an answer here. But nobody seems, especially on the left, nobody seems to want to actually fix the problem,” Glenn says.

“And so what do they want to do? They want to shut you up,” he adds, explaining that Governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill that “said fines and jail time [for] three years if you are interfering with the election.”

“This particular penalty is aimed at people who physically walk off with boxes of ballots,” Glenn explains. “Listen to the language around it.”

“The governor wrote a letter telling his officials to ‘count fast’ so the ‘election lies’ don’t take hold. Stop and think about that for a second. Wait a minute. The chief executive of the largest state in the union has appointed himself the man who decides which doubts are lies,” he says.

“And in the same season, his allies pass a provision that tells election observers they may no longer challenge the signatures on the ballot they’re watching get counted. So, they didn’t criminalize your doubt. They did something quieter,” he continues. “They turned down the lights in the room where the counting happens. And you’re told it’s a conspiracy theory to ask, ‘Why did it get so dark?’”

Glenn explains that a glaring issue with this is that the government cannot ever “be the arbiter of truth.”

“Especially when the question on the table is about the government itself. You cannot let the accused run the evidence room,” he says.

“You’re accusing California of having fraud, and what do they do? They say, ‘No, we’re in charge.’ Right? You’re the one that everybody’s saying is causing the fraud, and they’re saying, ‘No, you can’t question because there’s no fraud,’” he continues. “That doesn’t help anything.”

“This is not a conservative idea or a liberal idea. It’s just how you keep a free people free,” he adds.

​Glenn beck, The blaze, Gavin newsom, California, Spencer pratt, Nithya raman, Karen bass, Governor, Mayor, Election fraud, The glenn beck program 

The driver and passenger of a tractor trailer are facing federal charges after they sped away from a Border Patrol checkpoint before having to stop after their vehicle caught fire.

Bodycam footage published by WFAA-TV showed police officers frantically trying to open the trailer doors to save the dozens of suspected illegal aliens inside.

All of the migrants were pulled to safety, and no one was harmed.

On June 4 at about 8:36 p.m., Jairo Julian Holguin-Florentino was driving the tractor trailer through the Falfurrias checkpoint before a service canine alerted police to the possible presence of trafficked migrants.

The driver sped away on Highway 281 instead of stopping for a secondary inspection, and various agencies gave chase.

Police used spikes to flatten the vehicle’s tires in an attempt to stop the driver, but he continued to drive on the rims and the vehicle caught fire.

The driver and passenger were dragged out of the cab and arrested when police said they heard screaming coming from the locked cargo trailer of the burning vehicle.

Video showed officers rescuing dozens of migrants as smoke and fire engulfed the trailer. All of the migrants were pulled to safety, and no one was harmed.

Officials later said there were 39 rescued illegal aliens who were from Brazil, Cuba, Ecuador, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Peru, and Venezuela.

The Texas Department of Safety published video of body camera footage from the incident on its YouTube channel.

RELATED: At least 46 illegal aliens found DEAD in a trailer in San Antonio, and death toll may climb higher

“This case highlights the serious risks associated with human smuggling, including dangerous and life-threatening conditions inside concealed vehicles,” reads a statement from the U.S. Border Patrol about the incident.

Holguin-Florentino is the father-in-law of the passenger who was arrested, Cristian Johansel Mirambeaux-Martinez.

“This incident is a reminder of the dangerous lengths human smugglers will go to when engaging in this criminal activity, and DPS is proud to work with our federal partners, like [U.S. Border Patrol], to stop them,” reads a statement from the Texas Department of Public Safety.

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

​Bodycam footage, Burning trailer, Human smugglers, Us border patrol, Politics 

Philadelphia police have released surveillance video of suspects wanted in the fatal shooting of a Penn State student in South Philadelphia, WPVI-TV reported.

Billy Schmidt, 22, was shot dead early Saturday morning in the 1900 block of Durfor Street, the station said.

‘He was a really good person who cared about everybody and never hurt or bothered a soul, never bothered anyone, and for him to get shot like that is a travesty.’

Investigators said video released Wednesday shows suspects walking in the area of 20th Street from Ritner Street to Jackson Street before encountering Schmidt, WPVI said.

The suspects also allegedly were seen fleeing on foot in the area of 22nd and Porter streets after the shots were fired, the station said.

Schmidt, a Penn State senior, was shot just yards from his family’s home around 1:30 a.m., WPVI reported.

Family members told the station Schmidt was returning from a nearby bar where he was watching the NBA Finals with friends.

“He was a really good person who cared about everybody and never hurt or bothered a soul, never bothered anyone, and for him to get shot like that is a travesty,” Bill Schmidt, the victim’s father, told WPVI.

More from the station:

Surveillance video captured by nearby cameras appears to show the moments leading up to the shooting. In one video, a man can be seen throwing a cell phone. Seconds later, another man runs around a corner with Schmidt chasing him. The gunman then turns around and shoots Schmidt in the chest.

Bill Schmidt said he later found his son’s phone under a car and turned it over to police.

“I’m shocked he chased them after they took his phone,” the elder Schmidt said, according to WPVI. “From what we’re told, another person came out and shot him.”

Lifelong friends of Schmidt gathered at a memorial in South Philadelphia on Wednesday evening, the station said.

“Leaning on each other is all we did growing up, and that’s what we’ll continue to do,” Jaden Kelly of South Philadelphia told WPVI.

“I hope they find them. I want [them] in jail. That’s what I want. They don’t deserve to get to walk away from what they did,” Matthew Segal of South Philadelphia also told the station.

RELATED: Karmelo Anthony appeals his murder conviction in stabbing death of Austin Metcalf

Friends told WPVI they didn’t learn of Schmidt’s death until the next day; now they’re cherishing the moments they had with him Friday night into Saturday morning.

“The way he always said goodbye. It was a big hug and ‘I love you,’ and I’m happy we got to say that one last time,” Gino Russo of South Philadelphia recalled to the station.

A vigil was set for Thursday night, WPVI said.

“They are animals for doing that to him,” the victim’s sister said, according to a Fox News video.

In addition, police are offering a $20,000 reward for information leading to an arrest and conviction, WPVI said, adding that those with information are asked to call 215-686-TIPS.

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

​Crime, Philadelphia, Fatal shooting 

Vance Boelter admitted to shooting Mark Hortman at the entrance of the victim’s home before chasing down Melissa Hortman to shoot her numerous times and place his 9mm gun to her head.

The guilty plea ended the federal criminal prosecution in the horrific murders of a Democratic Minnesota state representative and her husband, as well as the attack on another political couple.

‘While the legal process may provide accountability, true healing requires something more from all of us.’

Boelter was arrested by the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office two days after the June 14, 2025, attack that shook Minnesota.

He had impersonated a police officer when he showed up at the home of Minnesota state Sen. John Hoffman and shot him and his wife numerous times before he shot at their daughter, Hope Hoffman.

Boelter then went to the Hortmans’ front door to kill the couple.

Prosecutors said he had a list of other lawmakers he was targeting and visited the homes of those lawmakers but found no one at home.

John Hoffman, his wife Yvette Hoffman, and their family were in the audience at today’s hearing.

Boelter pleaded guilty to two counts of stalking, two counts of murder, and two counts of firearm discharge. He agreed to serve two life sentences and another 40 years in prison. In exchange, prosecutors agreed to not seek the death penalty, according to U.S. Attorney for Minnesota Daniel Rosen.

“Political violence is a scourge in our nation,” Rosen said after the plea deal. “We now expect Vance Boelter will spend the rest of his natural life in prison without parole. To all of those who would commit political violence: this Justice Department will seek and obtain the longest prison terms for your offense.”

Boelter is also facing numerous state charges related to the attacks, including first-degree premeditated murder, attempted first-degree murder, felony cruelty to an animal, and impersonating a police officer.

RELATED: Exclusive: Assassination suspect Vance Boelter tells STUNNING inside story about shooting

The Hoffman family released a statement Thursday about the plea deal.

“There is not justice when our family and our state will never truly heal. While the legal process may provide accountability, true healing requires something more from all of us,” their statement reads.

“The choice we’ve made is to go forward with public service and being present for our community,” the family added. “The opportunity to justice is for Minnesotans and Americans to serve is to treat people with respect, to stop de-humanizing each other, and to stop dividing our country with hate and rhetoric.”

A GoFundMe page set up to help pay for the Hoffmans’ recovery raised over $265K.

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

​Vance boelter, Melissa hortman, Political violence, John hoffman, Impersonating an officer, Politics