Women are abandoning the political right, and BlazeTV host John Doyle is questioning whether the shift is rooted in conviction — or something more superficial.

A recent New York Magazine article titled “The Young Women Leaving the New Right” highlights these women — some who remain anonymous — who say they regret their involvement in right-wing politics.

“We love women, but instead, we have to talk really about this kind of phenomenon of women existing, e-celeb women existing, you know, ditching the right for dumb reasons,” Doyle begins.

The women featured in the article cite the growing resentment and misogyny that their right-wing following began to display as a reason they were pushed away, which Doyle notes is not a good enough reason to disavow an entire political ideology — especially if someone truly believed in that ideology in the first place.

“Not that you shouldn’t be able to, but you shouldn’t sort of ascend in a certain space, have a bad time perhaps because of personal reasons, and then come back and try to destroy that space, which again is more or less committed to the success of the country that you claim to care about,” Doyle explains.

“There are also other people, you know, other stories of this obviously in the last few years, people disavowing the entire right wing after having made their name. You know, they cultivate a sort of persona and then they don’t get exactly what they want in terms of money, attention,” he continues.

“Their personal lives kind of implode, and now all of a sudden, it’s a big problem with the entire right-wing space. They go give interviews to leftists, and they call MAGA a cult. They say that right-wing women are jumping the ship because of people being mean on the internet. And then they also claim that it’s going to make the Republicans lose the midterms in 2028,” he says.

Doyle points out that the right isn’t “more misogynistic now than it was in 2024 when Trump won the popular vote and every swing state.”

“I don’t think that’s the case. I think what’s really happening here is a bunch of right-wing female influencers maybe made a couple bad choices, maybe let a couple people get under their skin,” Doyle says.

“Now they have become maybe a little scorned and decided to try to make the party of open borders and child transgenderism win. Maybe that’s like kind of all there is to it,” he adds.

Want more from John Doyle?

To enjoy more of the truth about America and join the fight to restore a country that has been betrayed by its own leaders, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​The john doyle show, John doyle, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Right wing, Why women are leaving the new righ, Women leaving the right, Feminism, Conservative, President trump, Trump administration 

Thousands participated in the No Kings rally in downtown Los Angeles, which escalated into a violent riot, resulting in dozens of arrests.

The Department of Homeland Security stated that a group of roughly 1,000 people surrounded a federal government office on Saturday evening.

‘To those who were smashing concrete blocks and throwing them at our officers, we have you on video.’

“Rioters are throwing rocks, bottles, and cement blocks at officers. Two officers hit with the cement blocks are receiving medical care,” the DHS said.

The Los Angeles Police Department reported that it arrested 75 people in connection with Saturday’s protest. The arrests occurred after a dispersal order was issued at 5:30 p.m.

“Several splinter groups remain in the Civic Center Area hours after the demonstration has concluded. Multiple dispersal orders have been given with multiple arrests being made,” the LAPD wrote Saturday evening.

The LAPD stated that 66 adults and eight juveniles were arrested for failure to disperse. Another individual was arrested for possession of a dirk or dagger.

RELATED: Inside the No Kings rallies — violent protests EXPOSED

Jon Putman/Anadolu/Getty Images

Fox News shared a video of an agitator spray-painting the side of a federal building in Los Angeles. The individual wrote in red paint, “Kill your local ICE agent.”

DHS called the agitator’s actions “disgraceful.”

“Our ICE law enforcement officers are facing an 8,000% increase in death threats as they arrest murderers, rapists, pedophiles, gang members, and terrorists from American communities,” DHS said.

“Federal agents have started arresting those who assaulted our personnel at the Los Angeles courthouse. To those who were smashing concrete blocks and throwing them at our officers, we have you on video. We will find you and arrest you too. You’ve been warned,” First Assistant United States Attorney Bill Essayli stated.

Another video shared by Fox News showed a crowd of agitators kicking a fence outside a DHS building.

RELATED: ‘Misplaced mothering’: No Kings anti-Kirk protesters reveal a culture in crisis

Jay L Clendenin/Getty Images

No Kings rallies were held in cities across the nation over the weekend. The event’s organizers claimed that at least 8 million people attended over 3,300 rallies in the U.S., calling it the “largest single-day nonviolent protest in modern American history.”

In New York City, some protesters participating in the No Kings rally waved Communist flags, chanting, “There is only one solution: Communist Revolution.” The New York Police Department reported that tens of thousands of demonstrators “peacefully” demonstrated and that no protest-related arrests were made.

Meanwhile, footage surfaced from outside a Portland, Oregon, immigration detention center that showed a group of protesters breaking the gate.

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

​News, No kings, No kings protests, Los angeles, La, California, Department of homeland security, Dhs, Immigration and customs enforcement, Ice, Los angeles police department, Lapd, Bill essayli, Politics 

An illegal alien from Colombia who pled guilty to rape last week has reached a shocking plea agreement with the office of Democrat Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

According to the terms of the agreement, Nicol Suarez, a 31-year-old biological male who identifies as transgender, would be sentenced to six months, a sentence he has already served while awaiting trial, in exchange for pleading guilty to second-degree rape. In New York, second-degree rape typically results in two to seven years behind bars.

‘Six months in jail for raping a child is a gross miscarriage of justice.’

The accusations against Suarez are heinous. On February 11, 2025, Suarez was walking his dog in East Harlem when he followed a 14-year-old boy into a restroom inside a Bodega and raped him. The boy immediately reported the attack to bystanders in the area, and Suarez was arrested within hours for first-degree rape.

Following the arrest, ICE almost immediately lodged an immigration detainer against Suarez, who entered the U.S. illegally in 2023 under the Biden administration.

RELATED: Transgender illegal alien accused of raping boy, 14, in restroom; was freed last June after violent crime charges: Reports

Jason Alpert-Wisnia/Hans Lucas/AFP/Getty Images

What’s more, Suarez has been accused of violent crimes — armed robbery, prostitution, and assault with a dangerous weapon — in Massachusetts, and the New York Post also alluded to possible outstanding charges in New Jersey.

The Trump Department of Homeland Security has slammed the lenient plea deal, calling the offered six-month sentence “insane.”

“This plea deal is a disgrace. Six months in jail for raping a child is a gross miscarriage of justice. This pervert was let into our country by the Biden administration and then again released from jail following his arrests for armed robbery, assault with a dangerous weapon, and prostitution,” said acting Assistant Secretary Lauren Bis.

According to the DHS, the New York Department of Corrections has agreed to honor the ICE detainer and “not release this child rapist into American communities.” Suarez is scheduled to be sentenced officially on April 27.

Bragg’s office and the New York Department of Corrections did not respond to a request for comment from Blaze News, though the Daily Mail published this statement from Bragg’s office: “We expect the defendant to remain detained and be deported following sentencing, due to the felony conviction.”

According to the Daily Mail, the DA’s office claimed that the plea agreement was made after consulting with the victim’s family and to spare the victim from having to testify.

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

​Alvin bragg, Manhattan district attorney, Nicol suarez, Dhs, Politics 

There was a time when Louis Theroux was the best documentary-maker alive. Not the most famous, not the flashiest — the best. He had a gift for making dangerous people feel comfortable enough to hang themselves with their own words.

His technique was deceptively simple: show up, look confused, ask the obvious question nobody else dared ask, and let the awkward silences do the heavy lifting.

Theroux spends much of the film asking genuinely dangerous, profit-driven men why they do not try being nicer.

The results were extraordinary. He immersed himself in the Westboro Baptist Church and revealed something more than fire-and-brimstone rhetoric — that hatred has a morning routine, eats cereal, and goes to bed at a reasonable hour.

He walked into San Quentin and found the prison’s strict social architecture more fascinating than horrifying. He sat with alcoholics dying in a hospital liver ward and captured something devastating without once reaching for a violin. He starred in a porn film fully clothed, somehow maintaining both his dignity and his curiosity.

His early work was morally serious without being moralistic — an almost impossible balance that he struck repeatedly.

That Theroux is gone.

Concern troll

In his place stands something considerably less interesting: a concerned therapist in training with a camera crew, packaging society’s oddballs for an audience that already knows what it thinks of them.

His latest Netflix outing, “Inside the Manosphere,” is the clearest evidence yet. Theroux plunges into the world of online alpha-male influencers — Harrison Sullivan, Justin Waller, Myron Gaines, Sneako — tracking their revenue streams, their rhetoric, and their relentless contempt for women.

Miami apartments. Spanish nightclubs. Podcast sets where female guests are humiliated for content.

Sullivan funnels Telegram followers to OnlyFans accounts for kickbacks while publicly mocking the creators. Waller hawks Andrew Tate’s $49-a-month “university.” Gaines, a man of genuine venom, performs dominance for the camera like someone who has mistaken cruelty for confidence.

The material is genuinely ripe. These men are running sophisticated grift operations dressed up as philosophy, monetizing male loneliness and directing the resulting rage at all women. They deserve scrutiny.

The problem is that Theroux no longer scrutinizes. He pathologizes.

Practiced horror

Every interaction becomes a therapeutic probe. Every exchange is framed as evidence of something “disturbing.” The wide-eyed incredulity — once a genuine performance of curiosity — now reads as practiced horror for a largely left-leaning platform.

When Sullivan admits bluntly that he would never have found an audience doing wholesome content — “If I’d just done good things, I would never have blown up” — it is the most honest moment in the film.

Theroux treats it as a tragedy. It is simply capitalism.

Sullivan knows exactly what he is doing.

The real story is not that these men are broken. It is that they have correctly identified a lucrative market of young men who feel abandoned by mainstream culture — and are bleeding them dry. That is the documentary.

Theroux keeps making a different one — a morality play in which he is cast as the bewildered voice of reason.

RELATED: Muscular Christianity: Debunking the manosphere’s lies

Ian Maule/Getty Images

Prepackaged pandering

The irony is that his presence amplifies the very thing he deplores. Sullivan’s mother, in a sharp moment the film almost buries, asks the obvious question: If you find this so reprehensible, why are you publicizing it?

Theroux spends much of the film asking genuinely dangerous, profit-driven men why they do not try being nicer — roughly as effective as asking Putin to send Zelenskyy a fruit basket.

He is outmatched by people who have spent years controlling their image, and he does not seem to notice. These are seasoned sharks who have fielded far worse and treat the beanpole Brit like a speed bump on the way to their next revenue stream.

What made the early work so extraordinary was Theroux’s apparent absence of agenda. He let meth addicts, dementia patients, Scientologists, and porn stars speak for themselves and trusted audiences to draw their own conclusions. He did not editorialize.

The manosphere documentary editorializes constantly — each segment arriving labeled, prejudged, prepackaged for viewers who tuned in already convinced.

This is what woke documentary-making looks like at its most comfortable: confirming what the audience believes in a way that seems like investigation.

It is virtuous voyeurism — and painfully dull television.

The manosphere — equal parts genuine grievance and cynical exploitation — is a real and fascinating phenomenon. The young men being farmed for subscription fees and manufactured resentment deserve actual examination, not a wagging finger and a worried look.

Theroux was once the person who could have done that.

Watch “Drinking to Oblivion.” Watch “The Most Hated Family in America.” Watch a man doing the hardest thing in journalism — entering without a verdict and finding something real on the other side.

Sadly, that man traded his instincts for a Netflix brief and never looked back.

He got paid. The audience got a lecture.

​Culture, Manosphere, Inside the manosphere, Netflix, Tv, Entertainment, Louis theroux, Review 

President Donald Trump is publicly weighing his options to pressure Iran’s new regime into making a deal to end hostilities.

As the conflict enters the fourth week, Trump reassured the America people that the United States is in the midst of “serious discussions” with Iran’s new, “more reasonable” regime to end the war. Although Trump said great progress has been made, he also threatened to obliterate key Iranian infrastructure if the conflict is not resolved in the near future.

‘This will be in retribution for our many soldiers.’

“The United States of America is in serious discussions with A NEW, AND MORE REASONABLE, REGIME to end our Military Operations in Iran,” Trump said in a Truth Social post Monday.

“Great progress has been made but, if for any reason a deal is not shortly reached, which it probably will be, and if the Hormuz Strait is not immediately ‘Open for Business,’ we will conclude our lovely ‘stay’ in Iran by blowing up and completely obliterating all of their Electric Generating Plants, Oil Wells and Kharg Island (and possibly all desalinization plants!), which we have purposefully not yet ‘touched.'”

RELATED: ‘TOTAL RESOLUTION’: Trump orders temporary suspension amid Iran peace talks

Nathan Howard/Getty Images

As Trump noted, the United States has refrained from striking these facilities after the president first announced the negotiations last week. Trump originally gave the Iranians a five-day window to strike a deal but later extended it by an additional 10 days.

If the strikes were to take place, Trump said they would be in “retribution” for the hundreds of Americans who have died at the hands of the Iranian regime.

“This will be in retribution for our many soldiers, and others, that Iran has butchered and killed over the old Regime’s 47 year ‘Reign of Terror,'” Trump said.

RELATED: Trump offers unique insight into Iran’s ‘strange’ negotiations: ‘It won’t be pretty!’

Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

Secretary of State Marco Rubio came short of naming these new negotiators, saying it would probably “get them in trouble.”

“I’m not going to disclose to you who those people are because it would probably get them in trouble with some other groups of people inside Iran,” Rubio told ABC News. “Look, there’s some fractures going on there internally. And at the end of the day, I think that if there are people in Iran who now, given everything that’s happened, are willing to move in a different direction for their country, that would be great.”

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

​Donald trump, Marco rubio, Iran war, Iranian regime, Ayatollah, Ground troops, Strait of hormuz, Operation epic fury, Oil fields, Kharg island, Peace talks, Negotiations, Politics 

Anti-abortion activist Lila Rose is sounding the alarm after a vote in the House of Lords moved to decriminalize abortion up to birth in the United Kingdom — a shift she says does not reflect public opinion.

According to Rose, the provision was inserted into a broader criminal justice bill, allowing it to pass with less scrutiny while dramatically expanding abortion access.

“So how did this happen?” Rose says to BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey on “Relatable.”

“There was a big bill that had to do with the police and had to do with criminalization and crimes, and the pro-abort activists in Parliament stuck in a decriminalization statute that would legalize abortion through all nine months in the U.K.,” she tells Stuckey.

Rose explains that the provision “means you can end the life of your baby up until the moment of birth and there’s no criminal penalties for you.”

“You can order an abortion pill via the mail. You can take it at home. You can kill your 32-week-old baby. … And there is zero liability. There is zero criminal penalty for that. So it’s a very dark day in the U.K., and of course the pro-life movement is galvanized now, saying we have to put a stop to this,” she says.

“Is it even possible for pro-lifers in the U.K. to put a stop to this? Or is it just the deal is done?” Stuckey asks.

“If they get enough members of Parliament, they can reverse this. So it’s a matter of rallying the political power and support,” Rose explains, pointing out that everyone who plans to fight for the pro-life cause in the U.K. is already facing an uphill battle — but they’re not alone.

“I do think there’s a growing unrest in the U.K. about how the government is, quite frankly, handling governance. This has to do in part with the protection of women and girls in the countries from rape and from attacks. It has to do with the lack of freedom of speech in the U.K., where people are praying outside abortion clinics or hospitals where abortions are happening and they’re thrown into jail for that,” she tells Stuckey.

“I think people of good faith and goodwill — pro-life people, pro-family people — need to build a fighting force like we have here in the United States and believe that it’s possible, and with the right political will, make the change happen that needs to happen,” 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.

​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, Lila rose, Pro life, Abortion, Pro abortion, The united kingdom, The united kingdom free speech, Uk abortion bill 

The man who may have been the most prolific mass murderer in American history died in prison last week at age 85. Kermit Gosnell, a Pennsylvania abortionist, was convicted in 2013 of murdering three babies.

Now, if your first thought is, “Yes, that’s what abortionists do. They kill babies. Others have probably killed more than he did,” I understand your point. But Gosnell’s case carried an added horror: infanticide. He killed babies who had already been born. That means everyone in the abortion debate should agree that these were human beings with rights.

Gosnell’s crimes reveal something ugly about American culture — something many would rather not face. They also reveal the providence of God.

Even the most ardent abortion-rights advocate usually stops short of openly defending infanticide. Most draw the line at first breath. When Peter Singer made the case for infanticide, the argument was so grotesque that many assumed he was merely pushing abortion logic to the edge to expose its absurdity.

A grand jury concluded that Gosnell likely killed hundreds of babies this way, though their bodies were destroyed and will never be recovered. The details remain horrific. Witnesses reported that if babies were breathing or showing signs of life, Gosnell would cut their spinal cords with scissors. The grand jury described his clinic, the Women’s Medical Society, as a “house of horrors.” Investigators found fetal remains stored in plastic bags, milk jugs, cat-food containers, and specimen cups. They found blood on the floor and furniture, cat feces, dust, and bags of biohazard waste piling up in the basement and freezer.

As a philosopher, I find myself asking two questions: How can a human being do such things to babies? And what does that say about our world?

In “The Brothers Karamazov,” Ivan Karamazov wonders whether God can exist if children suffer. He is less troubled by the suffering of adults, who may deserve some of what they endure. But when children suffer, his doubts explode. Gosnell’s crimes would have pushed Ivan past outrage and into open metaphysical revolt. Where was God when this happened?

But I would reframe the question. Where were we?

RELATED: ‘House of horrors’: America’s most infamous abortionist who murdered babies born alive faces his creator at 85

Mark Makela/Corbis/Getty Images

Gosnell’s story broke through — barely — only because of the infanticide. Had he confined himself to killing babies in the womb, countless people would have walked past his clinic every day and thought nothing of it. That is part of the indictment. The same culture that teaches young Ivan Karamazovs to doubt God often teaches them to defend abortion. Many of the professors who train students to sneer at divine justice also promote the practice that made Gosnell possible.

Could anything be more demonic?

It is almost as if they are saying, “If God existed, then I could not exist, because God would not permit evil like me.”

Some Democrats have defended late-term abortion and even flirted with arguments that edge toward Singer’s position. Such people cannot turn around and blame God for Gosnell. They are implicated in the same moral disorder. But the question presses beyond them. What sort of world should we expect when large numbers of people accept the killing of babies in the womb as normal?

Gosnell’s crimes reveal something ugly about American culture — something many would rather not face. They also reveal the providence of God, both in judging sin and in calling a nation to repent. That pattern runs throughout the Old Testament prophets.

America failed to learn the lesson of human dignity from the evil of slavery. Now many of the same arguments once used to justify slavery reappear in defense of abortion: They are not persons with legal rights; they are inferior; their lives depend on the will of another. The language changes. The moral logic does not.

And the logic has grown uglier over time.

Roe v. Wade was framed as a matter of medical privacy. The public, we were told, had no right to know what passed between a woman and her doctor. Supporters appealed to pity. An unwanted child, they argued, would face a hard life anyway. But the debate has since shifted. Judith Jarvis Thomson’s famous essay “A Defense of Abortion” compared pregnancy to having an unwanted violinist attached to your body. That argument now gets invoked to justify abortion at any stage on the grounds that “it is the mother’s body.”

Ivan would answer: Yes, but you are dismembering the baby’s body.

What happens to a culture that treats pregnancy and babies this way? Population decline follows. So does a dehumanization that spills into the rest of life. But providential consequences follow, too. Gosnell is one of them. America has tolerated the horror of baby-killing for decades, and Gosnell forced the country to look directly at what that horror becomes when pursued to its logical end: deny the unborn legal rights, then deny personhood to infants, then empower abortionists to decide that a baby becomes human only when the mother says so.

RELATED: Paul Ehrlich died. His contempt for human life didn’t.

Gene Arias/NBC/NBCU Photo Bank/Getty Images

We cannot keep one foot inside this evil and one foot outside it. Either human beings possess rights no matter where they are, from the womb to hospice care, or they do not.

It is time to repent.

I am also a pastor, and one of the most sobering truths in this entire story is that Gosnell did not cease to exist when he died. He stood before the throne of God to answer for those innocent lives. The babies he killed did not cease to exist either. They stand as witnesses to his crimes. Their blood cries out.

And those who have participated in abortion will one day face those they helped destroy.

That truth should drive every one of us to the cross of Christ, confessing our sin and looking to Him for mercy and redemption.

​Opinion & analysis