In a world where millions claim to be Christians while living lives indistinguishable from anyone else, it’s critical to understand the importance of authentic faith. It’s a bit more than “all you have to do is believe” (explained here), which is an unsupportable position according to scripture and Jesus’ own words.

But a companion misunderstanding is that you should never question your own faith. Some even say it’s a sin to do so.

As you examine your thoughts and attitudes and actions in the clear light of scriptural teaching, the Spirit will show you things to work on — guaranteed.

But again — that’s not what the Bible says.

The apostle Paul, writing to the Corinthians, told them to test themselves to see if they were in the faith — “examine yourselves!” he exclaimed (2 Corinthians 13:5). It’s never wrong to thoughtfully examine our own hearts to ensure we’re on the right track.

So having established that it’s not wrong — and in fact, it’s desirable to examine ourselves — let’s answer the million-dollar question: How do we know we are saved?

1. Understand what happens at salvation

Obviously, you won’t know if you’re saved if you don’t know what being saved means. It means that God has freely given you:

Eyes to see the truth of the gospel. You sincerely believe that Jesus lived, died, and rose again to pay for your sins.A heart to repent. You recognize your sin separates you from a holy God, and you want to pivot to a life in relationship with your creator. You want to align with His plans for your life, not your own.

In that moment when those things happen, God does a miracle:

He brings a dead person to life.He wipes your slate clean (even the sins you’ll still commit) because they were all nailed to the cross, so you are now justified — you are officially “righteous” because you are cleansed.You are saved from eternal separation from God (hell).God Himself, the Holy Spirit, comes to dwell in you, and the process of your sanctification (becoming more like Christ) begins. (It will take your whole life!) The Holy Spirit also seals you in Him, which means you will never lose this salvation.You are promised that one day you will be glorified, which means when you die, you will be free of all worldly cares and sins and will be in the very presence of Jesus.

So in light of the mind-boggling gifts you, the new believer, have just been granted — how else do you know you’re saved?

2. Learn to recognize the presence of the Holy Spirit

In his letter to the Ephesians, Paul says:

In Him, you also, after listening to the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation — having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, unto the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory. (Ephesians 1:13-14)

The Bible is clear that the Holy Spirit indwells us at the moment of salvation. It is not something that comes later, as some mistakenly teach. His presence in us is indeed proof of our salvation:

However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him. (Romans 8:9)

And later in that same chapter:

For as many as are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. … The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God. (Romans 8:14, 16)

So — the Holy Spirit in us helps us know that we belong to God. How, exactly?

Well, are you different than you were before you believed? Or more accurately, do you desire to be different, to love and serve the God who saved you? (Because it’s always about the heart’s desire, not some perfect behavior.)

If you want to change your life to align with God, that prompting is coming from the Holy Spirit. The Spirit’s assurance works in tandem with something else though.

3. Use scripture as a mirror

Are you reading and studying the Bible? Again — more precisely — do you have the desire to do so, even if you struggle to find a place for that in your busy schedule? Because the Holy Spirit will convict you of your need to be in the Word. If you’re feeling that prodding, that is itself an assurance of salvation. The Holy Spirit is in you, working.

And when you obey that prompting, He will illuminate the Bible for you to help you begin to become more like Jesus. As you examine your thoughts and attitudes and actions in the clear light of scriptural teaching, the Spirit will show you things to work on — guaranteed.

If you are wanting to be in the Word and wanting to obey the Spirit’s leading to change as you learn — that is a powerful assurance of your salvation.

RELATED: The laws freaked-out AI founders want won’t save us from tech slavery if we reject Christ’s message

Photo by Bloomberg/Getty Images

4. Seek out other believers

Are you in relationships with other believers? Are you going to or at least looking for a church? This life can’t be lived sitting on the sofa watching screen church — it requires real human interaction due to (among other things) the commandment Jesus gave us to love one another, which is impossible from your comfy couch.

Again, it comes down to obedience. The Spirit will prompt you to seek out other believers, because God designed us to be in those relationships, serving and loving each other, and being served and loved.

If you’re obeying Him in this, that is also a powerful assurance that you are saved, because stepping into an entirely new group of people we’ve never met before —which is how most of us start finding a church — does not come particularly easy to anyone.

5. Check your life for ‘fruit of the Spirit’

The Bible brims with teaching about fruit — we’re supposed to produce good fruit as followers of Jesus. More on this here, but for now, let’s look at what the Bible explicitly calls out as the “fruit of the Spirit” living in us (Galatians 5:22-23):

LoveJoyPeacePatienceKindnessGoodnessFaithfulnessGentlenessSelf-control

John MacArthur calls this “attitude fruit” — the attitudes we should begin to exhibit once we are saved. So that’s the fruit of the Spirit — attitudes the Spirit helps us develop.

But in that same chapter of Galatians, Paul also lists some opposites. “Deeds of the flesh” he calls them, which include:

Sexual immoralityImpuritySensualityIdolatrySorceryEnmitiesStrifeJealousyOutbursts of angerSelfish ambitionFactionsEnvying dissensionsDrunkennessCarousing“and things like these”

So are you more characterized by deeds of the flesh or the Spirit?

Or again let’s ask the right question — which do you desire to be more characteristic in your life? If it’s the good stuff, that is a desire implanted by the Holy Spirit within you — again, an assurance of salvation. And He will help you transform that desire more and more into reality, which will strengthen your assurance as well.

6. See how others have tackled this question

Q: What are some of the signs of genuine saving faith?
A: From the excellent website gotquestions.org

Q: What kind of things do and do not prove the genuineness of saving faith?
A: From Grace to You, John MacArthur’s website

7. Take heart from the words of Jesus

As I’ve written before, the question isn’t “will you believe in Jesus?” The question is “will you follow Jesus?”

If you repented and believed (described above), and now your desire is to follow Him and become more like Him — that desire is from the Holy Spirit within you, and you are assuredly saved. As Jesus said:

My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish — ever; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. I and the Father are one. (John 10:27-30)

A version of this essay previously appeared on She Speaks Truth.

​Christianity, Salvation, Jesus, Holy spirit, Bible, Lifestyle, Christian living, Faith 

BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey recently revisited a question the late Charlie Kirk often asked her in interviews — one that is often the topic of heated debate among Christians.

“For some reason, every time I did an interview with Charlie Kirk, he loved to ask this question because he knew what I was going to say, but he loved for me — I guess as a Christian woman — to answer it,” Stuckey recalls.

The question, Stuckey says, is “Can women be pastors?”

“The short answer is no. No,” she says, citing 1 Timothy 2:12-14.

“He is speaking within the context of talking about the orderliness of the local church. ‘I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor,” the verse reads.

“He goes all the way back to creation. And whenever we see anyone in scripture in the New Testament go back to creation, that tells us that this is grounded in something that is unchanging,” Stuckey comments.

“For example, in Genesis 9, when God commands the death penalty for a murder, he goes all the way back to the creation reality that man was made in God’s image. That is still true today, which is why I believe we should still give the death penalty for murder,” she explains.

“The simple fact that he goes back to Adam and Eve tells us something really important. So the question is, ‘What can women do biblically?’ Women are encouraged to teach other women and to teach children,” she continues.

And while Stuckey herself notes that she speaks out publicly, she says that “capability does not equal calling.”

“Obviously, I can talk. Obviously, I can explain things. I like to communicate. I love the word of God. I love breaking things down. But I am not called to be a pastor in a local church. I am not called to preach in a pulpit in a local church,” she explains.

“That is not my role. That is not any woman’s role,” 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.

​Free, Sharing, Camera phone, Upload, Video, Video phone, Youtube.com, Relatable with allie beth stuckey, Relatable, Allie beth stuckey, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Jesus, Christianity, Female pastor, Can women be pastors, God, Religion, Charlie kirk, Charlie kirk assassination 

President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice is moving to denaturalize a former mayor in Florida for allegedly misrepresenting his identity and immigration history to become a U.S. citizen.

Philippe Bien-Aime was first elected mayor of North Miami in 2019, but resigned in 2022 to lead an unsuccessful bid for the Miami-Dade County Commission.

‘The complaint alleges that this defendant built his citizenship on fraud — using false identities, false statements, and a sham marriage to evade a lawful removal order.’

The DOJ filed a denaturalization case against Bien-Aime on February 18.

Prosecutors state Bien-Aime “willfully misrepresented his identity and immigration history throughout the naturalization process,” WTVJ reported.

Department of Homeland Security records, including fingerprint comparisons, found that Bien-Aime was previously ordered removed from the U.S. under the name Philippe Janvier, court documents claimed.

An immigration judge found in 2000 that Janvier entered the U.S. by fraudulently using a photo-switched passport. The judge ordered his deportation to his country of birth, Haiti.

RELATED: Kentucky driver’s licensing scandal: 5 charged for allegedly illegally issuing licenses to immigrants in exchange for cash

Photo by J. David Ake/Getty Images

“In 2001, Bien-Aime was placed in removal proceedings and ordered removed under the Janvier identity,” a DOJ press release read. “He appealed the removal order, but he withdrew the appeal, representing that he had returned to live in Haiti. In reality, Bien-Aime remained in the United States and, using the new name and date of birth, married a U.S. citizen to obtain permanent resident status.”

The DOJ claimed the marriage was fraudulent and invalid because he was already married to a Haitian citizen.

“After making numerous false and fraudulent statements in adjustment and naturalization proceedings, he naturalized in 2006 under the Bien-Aime identity,” the department stated.

RELATED: Stopping the steal: Sen. Lee, Republicans demand Election Day integrity ahead of SCOTUS fight over ‘rolling’ ballot counts

Photo by John Moore/Getty Images

If the DOJ’s denaturalization case against Bien-Aime is successful, it could raise legal questions about his time in office, WTVJ reported.

Peterson St. Philippe, Bien-Aime’s attorney, told the Miami Herald, “We believe it is appropriate to address the allegations through the judicial process rather than through public commentary. We trust that any reporting will reflect that the matter remains unresolved and that no findings have been made.”

North Miami Mayor Alix Desulme told the news outlet that he and his administration were unaware of the claims against Bien-Aime.

“The complaint alleges that this defendant built his citizenship on fraud — using false identities, false statements, and a sham marriage to evade a lawful removal order,” said U.S. Attorney Jason A. Reding Quiñones for the Southern District of Florida. “The fact that he later served as an elected mayor makes the alleged deception even more serious, because public office carries a duty of candor and respect for the rule of law.”

“This administration will not permit fraudsters and tricksters who cheat their way to the gift of U.S. citizenship,” stated Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate of the DOJ’s Civil Division. “The passage of time does not diminish blatant immigration fraud.”

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

​News, Florida, North miami, Philippe bien-aime, Department of justice, Doj, Justice department, Department of homeland security, Dhs, Philippe janvier, Haiti, Denaturalization, Denaturalize, Politics 

A 27-year-old male allegedly stole a car in Chicago with a boy in the back seat after the child’s father stepped away from it — then soon bailed out of the vehicle while it was still moving.

Authorities said the scary incident took place around 9:20 p.m. last Friday night in the 800 block of North Milwaukee Avenue, CWB Chicago reported.

Investigators recovered surveillance video that allegedly linked Miller to the incident, the outlet reported.

Prosecutors said a 34-year-old man stepped out of his 2014 Hyundai Elantra, leaving his 12-year-old son in the back seat, the outlet reported.

Just moments later, the suspect — identified as Jordan Miller of East Chicago, Indiana — allegedly got behind the wheel and drove away southbound on Milwaukee with the boy still inside the vehicle, the outlet said.

It’s not clear from the outlet if the dad left the car unlocked with keys inside it or not.

The boy asked Miller where his father was, but Miller responded by pushing the boy back into his seat and tossing the child’s phone out of the car, the outlet said, citing police.

Prosecutors said Miller soon bailed out of the car without putting it in park, after which it rolled out of control with the child inside, the outlet said.

The Elantra crashed into another car in the 900 block of West Fry Street, the outlet said. The location is less than a half mile from the spot where the vehicle was stolen.

Emergency responders took the 12-year-old to Lurie Children’s Hospital for treatment of pain in his head, back, and eye, the outlet said.

Officers found Miller in the 1000 block of West Chicago Avenue, the outlet said, adding that he matched a description the boy and witnesses provided.

RELATED: Florida man steals car from gas station with 1-year-old in back seat — then soon returns car, apologizes to mother: Cops

Armando L. Sanchez/Chicago Tribune

Investigators recovered surveillance video that allegedly linked Miller to the incident, the outlet reported.

Miller was taken to Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center, where he was treated and released for cuts on his left hand, the outlet said, citing a police report.

Miller was charged with robbery, aggravated kidnapping of a child younger than 13, and possessing a stolen motor vehicle, the outlet said.

Cook County Jail records indicate Miller was booked Sunday on no bond; his next hearing is scheduled for March 13.

Judge Anthony Calabrese during a detention hearing ordered Miller held pending trial, the outlet said.

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

​Chicago, Arrest, Robbery, Aggravated kidnapping of a child younger than 13, Possessing a stolen motor vehicle, Car crash, Stealing car, 12-year-old boy, Father and son, Crime 

In a major blow to the Trump administration, the Supreme Court has ruled against Trump’s use of tariffs, a major part of his economic strategy in his second term.

On Friday morning, the Supreme Court published its decision in the case Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump.

The Supreme Court split 6-3, with the majority ruling that President Trump does not have the authority to impose the tariffs under the IEEPA.

The case, which was argued in November, challenged the legality of Trump’s imposition of tariffs through the invocation of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

The Supreme Court split 6-3, with the majority ruling that Trump does not have the authority to impose the tariffs under the IEEPA, despite the pretext of declaring a twofold national emergency to address the drug influx from Canada, Mexico, and China and to address the trade deficit, which the administration argued had hollowed out America’s manufacturing base.

RELATED: Trump threatens Republican lawmakers after 6 defy him in House vote on Canada tariffs

Photo by Nathan Howard/Getty Images

The majority opinion was written by Chief Justice John Roberts, except for a few sections. Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson joined the concurrence on only a few of the sections.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote the dissenting opinion and was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

Thomas wrote a separate dissenting opinion, though he noted that he joined Kavanaugh’s opinion in full. Thomas wrote separately “to explain why the statute at issue here is consistent with the separation of powers as an original matter,” citing the nondelegation doctrine.

President Trump announced a broad array of tariffs on April 2, which he declared “Liberation Day,” with the signing of Executive Order 14257.

Last month, Trump warned the American people of the economic dangers that could be coming to the United States if the Supreme Court ruled against his tariffs.

“The actual numbers that we would have to pay back if, for any reason, the Supreme Court were to rule against the United States of America on Tariffs, would be many Hundreds of Billions of Dollars, and that doesn’t include the amount of ‘payback’ that Countries and Companies would require for the Investments they are making on building Plants, Factories, and Equipment, for the purpose of being able to avoid the payment of Tariffs. When these Investments are added, we are talking about Trillions of Dollars!” Trump wrote on Truth Social on January 12.

In the same post, Trump stressed the dire straits the country would be in in the event of a negative decision: “It may not be possible but, if it were, it would be Dollars that would be so large that it would take many years to figure out what number we are talking about and even, who, when, and where, to pay. Remember, when America shines brightly, the World shines brightly. In other words, if the Supreme Court rules against the United States of America on this National Security bonanza, WE’RE SCREWED!”

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

​Politics, Trade deficit, President trump, Liberation day, Supreme court, Scotus, Tariffs, Ieepa, Learning resources inc v trump 

Carter Camacho, who was arrested after he allegedly charged the United States Capitol with a loaded shotgun on Tuesday, told Capitol Police he “was just there to talk.”

Camacho, 18, was detained by Capitol Police after he exited his vehicle and allegedly ran toward the Capitol carrying a loaded 12-gauge shotgun and dressed in a “tactical-style vest” and “camouflage-style clothing.” Officers also reportedly recovered additional rounds of ammunition in Camacho’s possession.

‘Please avoid the area.’

The Georgia teenager was later charged with one count of unlawful possession of a firearm within the United States Capitol grounds.

Once officers placed Camacho in handcuffs, the teenager told Capitol Police that he was “just there to talk to a member of Congress,” according to a DOJ press release.

RELATED: Suspected gunman arrested outside Congress

Police also located a “fixed-blade knife” about 40 feet from the suspect’s vehicle but noted that the case is still being investigated. Camacho made his first court appearance Wednesday and is expected to return to court on March 2. He will remain in custody until then, WTOP reported.

Capitol Police initially announced the incident on social media on Tuesday, saying officers had arrested an individual with “what appears to be a gun” outside the Capitol.

RELATED: FBI forced to release damning docs revealing chilling new details on Trump’s would-be assassin

Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

“Our officers just arrested a person with what appears to be a gun near the West Front of the U.S. Capitol Building,” the statement reads. “Please avoid the area. We will provide more information when new information is confirmed.”

Capitol Police also temporarily closed Maryland Avenue between First and Third Streets Southwest before concluding there was no further threat.

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

​Carter camacho, Congress, Capitol hill, Capitol police, Firearm, Shotgun, Washington dc, Dc crime, Politics 

In the latest development for UFO enthusiasts, President Donald Trump has made an enormous promise after a recent back-and-forth about comments from former President Barack Obama.

On Thursday, President Trump signaled his support for beginning the process of disclosure surrounding UFOs, aliens, and more.

‘Begin the process of identifying and releasing Government files related to alien and extraterrestrial life.’

“Based on the tremendous interest shown, I will be directing the Secretary of War, and other relevant Departments and Agencies, to begin the process of identifying and releasing Government files related to alien and extraterrestrial life, unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), and unidentified flying objects (UFOs), and any and all other information connected to these highly complex, but extremely interesting and important, matters. GOD BLESS AMERICA!” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

RELATED: ‘He made a big mistake’: Trump accuses Obama of revealing classified information on aliens

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

This evening announcement came shortly after Trump fielded questions about some comments former President Obama made during a “speed round” interview in which he suggested that aliens are “real.” Obama later walked those remarks back a bit on social media.

When asked by Fox News’ Peter Doocy about Obama’s comments, Trump suggested that Obama “gave classified information. He’s not supposed to be doing that.”

“So aliens are real?” Doocy asked.

“I don’t know if they’re real or not,” Trump responded. “I can tell you he gave classified information. He’s not supposed to be doing that. He made a big mistake. He took it out of classified information.”

“I may get him out of trouble by declassifying,” Trump joked.

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

​Politics, Peter doocy, Trump, President trump, Obama, President obama, Uap, Ufo, Extraterrestrial life, Aliens, Uap disclosure 

American fans have been waiting for an athlete to come out in full support of the red, white, and blue during the Olympics.

After a string of athletes have denigrated U.S. law enforcement, criticized the current administration, and even switched teams to compete for China, viewers have been looking for a hero to celebrate at the 2026 Winter Olympics.

‘Happy to represent it here with these guys.’

Enter Quinn Hughes, a 26-year-old Florida native who plays for the NHL’s Minnesota Wild. Hughes scored an overtime goal to beat Sweden 2-1 on Wednesday, advancing Team USA to the semifinals.

After the game, NBC News sports editor Greg Rosenstein posted an interview with Hughes following his heroic performance. In the video, a reporter asks Hughes about the mass of American flags in the audience during the game and how it felt hearing the crowd chant “U-S-A!”

“What’s that atmosphere like?” the journalist asked.

“It’s special,” Hughes replied. “I love the U.S., and it’s the greatest country in the world. So [I’m] happy to represent it here with these guys.”

The defenseman added, “It’s really special.”

RELATED: NBC apologizes for calling female skier ‘she’

The Olympics has been, unfortunately, shrouded in vitriolic political statements, which have included American figure skater Amber Glenn saying her “human rights” were at risk because of President Trump.

Half-American, half-British athlete Gus Kenworthy brazenly posted a photo in early February in which it appeared he had urinated in snow to spell out “F**k ICE,” referring to immigration enforcement officers.

Politics even hit Olympic venues when a boutique hotel in Milan, set to host American athletes, changed its name from Ice House to Winter House. The name was allegedly changed to ensure that it remained “a private space free of distractions.”

RELATED: Skier Hunter Hess changes tune after saying he has ‘mixed emotions’ about representing USA: ‘I love my country’

Photo by Stefano Guidi/Getty Images

Hughes’ goal came on the eve of the USA women’s hockey team winning an overtime game of their own. On Thursday, the ladies beat Canada 2-1 in what could end up being the first of two Canada vs. USA finals.

The American men play Slovakia on Friday at 3:10 p.m. ET. If they beat the Slovaks and Canada beats Finland (also on Friday), the USA and Canada would meet for a gold medal showdown, which airs Sunday, February 22, at 8:10 a.m. ET.

Canada’s last gold in men’s ice hockey was in 2014, the country’s third in four Olympics. Two of those wins came over the United States.

The U.S. has not won gold since the notable 1980 “Miracle” team in Lake Placid.

The United States has the third-most gold medals in men’s hockey, tied with Sweden with two. The Soviet Union/Russia and Canada both have nine.

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

​News, Sports, Usa, Team usa, Hockey, Men’s hockey, Women’s sports, Canada, Olympics, Italy, 2026 olympics, Ice hockey, Politics 

Republican Rep. Tony Gonzales of Texas is making accusations of blackmail in the aftermath of an alleged affair he had with a staffer who later committed suicide by lighting herself on fire.

Gonzales’ former staffer Regina Santos-Aviles reportedly sent a text to her co-worker in April 2025 claiming to have had an “affair” with their “boss.” Just months later, in September, Santos-Aviles took her own life.

Gonzales, who is married with children, is now accusing a lawyer representing Santos-Aviles’ husband, Adrian Aviles, of blackmail.

‘You are guilty and should resign.’

“I WILL NOT BE BLACKMAILED,” the Trump-endorsed congressman said in a post on X Thursday. “Disgusting to see people profit politically and financially off a tragic death.”

“The public should IMMEDIATELY have full access to the Uvalde Police report,” Gonzales added. “I will keep fighting for #TX23.”

RELATED: Texas Republican’s staffer fatally set herself on fire last year — text now seems to confirm their alleged affair

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call Inc. via Getty Images

Gonzales also posted an apparent screenshot of a message from Aviles’ lawyer, Robert J. Barrera, offering a settlement and nondisclosure agreement. Barrera confirmed to Blaze News that the communication was from his firm on behalf of Aviles as part of a “confidential settlement negotiation” that was sent to Gonzales’ lawyers on February 10.

“What Tony printed is not the entire email, clearly,” Barrera told Blaze News. “… He cut out the significant reason of why we were attempting to settle and the evidence we had.”

Barrera noted that the discreet nature of the communication goes against the claim that he intended to blackmail the congressman as Gonzales had claimed.

“What I guess Tony, in his anger and rage, doesn’t read is that letter clearly states we had no intention of wrecking his political career,” Barrera told Blaze News. “Had we intended that, we would have not engaged in settlement communications. We would have just filed and gotten all the publicity we could in suing him for sexual assault and retaliation and office harassment, which is all covered under the Congressional Accountability Act.”

“In his desperate rage, Tony Gonzales went public with our attempts to settle the case under a confidentiality agreement, which is beyond common in these situations.”

Gonzales’ office did not respond to Blaze News’ request for comment.

RELATED: ‘Loser mentality!’ Sparks fly as Texas Republicans spar to succeed Ken Paxton in debate moderated by Allie Beth Stuckey

Photo by Scott Stephen Ball for the Washington Post via Getty Images

Notably, Aviles replied to Gonzales’ post, denying the blackmail accusation and issuing a scathing rebuke of the congressman for what he called a “consistent pattern of evasion, refusal to take accountability, and outright lies to protect [his] image.”

“You’re a classic case of a two-faced politician who says whatever is convenient to save face,” Aviles said in the post. “We chose to hold back the full police report and body cam footage for one reason only it shows my wife suffering severe burns in horrific detail. I will not allow that graphic material to become accessible to our 8 year old son in the future when he is old enough to search for or come across it.”

“Nothing in that police report protects you, that decision is about protecting our child’s well-being, not concealing anything improper,” Aviles added. “Your actions have been disgraceful, and you continue to mislead your constituents with falsehoods. You may avoid responsibility here on earth, but one day you will answer to a higher authority. Today, though, you still answer to the people you represent—people who deserve the truth, not more deception.”

Gonzales’ primary opponent Brandon Herrera, a gun YouTuber who nearly unseated the Texas Republican in 2024, also sounded off on social media in a post on X.

“You are guilty and should resign.”

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

​Tony gonzales, Brandon herrera, Donald trump, Regina santos-aviles, 2026 primary, Texas primary, Republican primary, Uvalde police, Blackmail, Politics 

Texas Democrats Jasmine Crockett and James Talarico have found themselves running against each other in the race for the Texas Senate seat — and BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales couldn’t be more entertained.

“There is a cage match a brewin’ between, I’ve got to say, two of the most libtarded people that may have ever existed,” Gonzales jokes.

“In the blue corner, you have Jasmine Crockett, the fake ghetto hood rat herself. And then in the other blue … corner, you have Texas state Representative James Talarico,” she continues, pointing out that Talarico has become the center of recent controversy after Stephen Colbert claimed an interview with the Texas politician wasn’t allowed to air on CBS.

“That’s actually not true, because CBS has already said that they did not pull Stephen Colbert’s James Talarico interview.”

“The Late Show was not prohibited by CBS from broadcasting the interview with Representative James Talarico. The show was provided legal guidance that the broadcast could trigger the FCC equal time rule for two other candidates, including Jasmine Crockett, and presented options for how the equal time for other candidates could be fulfilled,” a statement from CBS read.

“It was ‘The Late Show’ itself that decided to present the interview through its YouTube channel with on-air promotion on the broadcast rather than potentially providing the equal-time options,” the statement concluded.

“There was a lie. It’s just been, actually I think, a ploy to try and prop up this lame soy-boy candidate because the Democrats know that if their candidate is Jasmine Crockett, they’re f**ked,” Gonzales comments.

“Now, I would also argue they’re screwed either way because James Talarico is not winning U.S. Senate in the state of Texas. Like, that’s not happening. But he is less of a train wreck and he is, I guess, less embarrassing,” she continues, before showing clips of Crockett calling out Talarico for his claims.

“I think she should just accuse Stephen Colbert of being racist,” Gonzales jokes.

“’He didn’t want to have a black woman on to talk about her Senate race,’” she adds.

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

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

​Sharing, Free, Video, Camera phone, Video phone, Upload, Youtube.com, Sara gonzales unfiltered, Sara gonzales, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Democrats, Jasmine crockett, James talarico, Texas senate race, Stephen colbert, Fcc rules, President trump, The trump administration 

President Donald Trump has made abundantly clear that he is willing to attack Iran. Recent polling suggests, however, that Americans are not particularly keen on getting bogged down in another Middle Eastern conflict.

The tightrope

Trump has long been critical of his predecessors’ costly foreign entanglements, indicating both that he would end “the era of endless wars” and that it was not the job of American forces to “solve ancient conflicts in faraway lands that many people have not even heard of.”

‘Bad things will happen.’

The “peace president,” who has in recent years brokered numerous peaceful resolutions between warring parties, has been walking a tightrope with regard to Iran.

The Trump administration’s National Security Strategy noted, “We want to prevent an adversarial power from dominating the Middle East, its oil and gas supplies, and the chokepoints through which they pass while avoiding the ‘forever wars’ that bogged us down in that region at great cost.”

Despite skepticism from friends and foe alike, the administration pulled off its clinical strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities on June 22 without wavering on the tightrope.

That successful balancing act is, however, now threatened by the apparent lack of progress in America’s indirect negotiations with Iran regarding the Shia nation’s nuclear program.

The situation

Trump stated at his Board of Peace’s first meeting on Thursday that Iran “cannot continue to threaten the stability of the entire region.”

The president said that “bad things will happen” if Tehran doesn’t make a deal to limit its nuclear program — something Majid Takht-Ravanchi, Iran’s foreign minister, suggested was possible ahead of the so-far unsuccessful indirect talks this week.

RELATED: Iran strike looms as Trump hosts Board of Peace

The Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group entering the Arabian Sea on Feb. 6. Photo: U.S. Central Command

“We may have to take it a step further, or we may not. Maybe we are going to make a deal. You are going to be finding out over the next, probably, 10 days,” added Trump.

Although a decision to attack has not yet been made, Trump has clearly taken steps to ensure that it’s a viable option, assembling the greatest U.S. military air presence in the Middle East since the 2003 Iraq invasion.

U.S. officials told the Wall Street Journal that this air power would enable America to wage a weeks-long air war against Iran.

Trump has reportedly received several briefings on military options, including decapitation strikes on Iran’s political and military leaders with the goal of regime change and/or strikes on nuclear and ballistic-missile facilities.

In the meantime, Iran has reportedly been fortifying its nuclear facilities, repairing missile production sites damaged by Israel’s June surprise attack, and participating in military exercises, including naval drills with Russian forces.

The polls

A Gallup poll found two weeks ahead of the 2003 invasion of Iraq that 59% of Americans favored and 37% opposed the proposed military intervention.

After the media dutifully banged the drums of war and Bush played up the threat of weapons of mass destruction, support for war climbed to 71% by March 19, 2003, according to a poll conducted by the Washington Post and ABC News.

There is presently nowhere near that level of support for another military attack against Iran.

An SSRS/University of Maryland poll conducted earlier this month posed the question, “Do you favor or oppose the United States initiating an attack on Iran under the current circumstances?”

Altogether, 21% of respondents said they favored an attack, 49% signaled opposition, and 30% said they didn’t know.

When broken down by party affiliation, 40% of Republicans, 6% of Democrats, and 21% of independents said they favored an attack. Twenty-five percent of Republicans, 74% of Democrats, and 51% of independents said they opposed an attack.

In a follow-up, pollsters asked, “Whose interests do you think would be most advanced by a war between the U.S. and Iran?”

Only 34% of Republicans, 32% of Democrats, and 29% of independents said American interests would be most advanced.

An Economist/YouGov poll conducted between Jan. 30 and Feb. 2 similarly found that a military adventure in Iran was an unpopular prospect.

The poll found that 28% of respondents supported and 48% opposed the U.S. taking military action in Iran. Respondents who voted for Trump in 2024 were, however, majoritively (57%) supportive of an attack, with only 26% signaling opposition.

When asked about the U.S. using military force to overthrow the Iranian regime, 33% of respondents signaled support and 42% of respondents signaled opposition. Trump supporters were split 58% to 24% on the matter.

A Harvard CAPS/Harris poll of American voters revealed last month that the “Israeli-Hamas-Iran conflict” was a top concern for only 1% of respondents. Though it was apparently not regarded as a priority, 59% of respondents still said they think that the U.S. should support regime change in Iran.

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

​War, Peace, Donald trump, George w. bush, Iran, Tehran, Nuclear, Military, Intervention, Foreign entanglement, Israel, Ayatollah, Nuclear deal, Regime change, Politics