Idaho firefighters were dispatched around 1:21 p.m. Sunday after receiving a call about a brush fire in the woods on Canfield Mountain near Coeur d’Alene; roughly 40 minutes later, first responders reported coming under gunfire.

‘These firefighters did not have a chance.’

Kootenai County Sheriff Robert Norris initially announced that first responders were “actively taking sniper fire,” and he added that “we don’t know if there’s one, two, three, or four [shooters].”

First responders made urgent calls for help on their radios, the Associated Press reported: “Everybody’s shot up here … send law enforcement now.”

More than 300 law enforcement officers and the FBI responded to the scene, the New York Times reported.

RELATED: Church security team member who reportedly shot gunman dead outside sanctuary recalls moment when ‘evil came to our door’

Photo by ETIENNE LAURENT/AFP via Getty Images

Two firefighters were shot and killed; a third firefighter was wounded.

Norris said it appeared the sniper was hiding in the rugged terrain and using a high-powered rifle, the AP reported, adding that the sheriff said he instructed deputies to fire back.

Authorities later discovered the body of the suspected gunman with a weapon nearby. They moved the body as the fire spread. It wasn’t clear how the alleged male gunman died.

Authorities believe the gunman intentionally set the fire in order to lure firefighters to the scene.

RELATED: Child molesters can now be marched in front of firing squads in Idaho

Norris described the attack as a “total ambush.”

“These firefighters did not have a chance,” he added.

Norris indicated the suspected gunman acted alone, and his identity has not been released. Law enforcement declined to say what kind of weapon they found with the suspected gunman.

RELATED: Male, 70, at Tesla protest accused of driving his car into Trump-supporting counterprotester

Photo by Mehmet Yaren Bozgun/Anadolu via Getty Images

One fatally shot firefighter was from the Coeur d’Alene Fire Department; the other was with Kootenai County Fire and Rescue. The firefighter who survived the shooting was “fighting for his life” after surgery, Norris said, but was in stable condition.

The AP said in the evening the bodies of the slain firefighters arrived in the nearby city of Spokane, Washington — and escorted by a procession of fire and law enforcement vehicles. The outlet added that firefighters and others saluted as the vehicles passed by.

Idaho Governor Brad Little (R) wrote in a post on X, “Multiple heroic firefighters were attacked today while responding to a fire in North Idaho. This is a heinous direct assault on our brave firefighters. I ask all Idahoans to pray for them and their families as we wait to learn more. Teresa and I are heartbroken.”

RELATED: Leftist mayor ignores deep-red state law, flies racial LGBTQ flag

“As this situation is still developing, please stay clear from the area to allow law enforcement and firefighters to do their jobs,” he added.

Attorney General Pam Bondi wrote in a post on social media, “Thank you to our incredible @FBI agents on the ground assisting local authorities in Idaho. We are praying for all.”

A shelter-in-place order was lifted Sunday night, the AP said.

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

​News, Idaho, Coeur d’alene, Active shooter, Shooter, Firefighters, First responders, Shooting, Crime, Canfield mountain 

The new president of the International Olympic Committee has held her seat for just one week and is already making monumental moves.

As the head of the IOC, Kirsty Coventry wields tremendous power not only in the business world but in setting the tone worldwide for standards in sports.

‘We have to protect the female category, first and foremost.’

After assuming office on June 23, the former Zimbabwean swimmer took questions in a nearly hour-long press conference, where she made one thing clear: The Olympic Committee is moving away from placating transgender athletes.

About halfway through the event, Coventry, Africa’s most decorated Olympian, answered questions about how female events will look at the Olympics moving forward.

The 2024 Paris games were cloaked in shame after male Algerian athlete Imane Khelif competed and won gold in women’s boxing, causing massive public outrage. Khelif has been proven to be a man four times over but was still allowed to compete after the IOC ended gender testing in 1999, punting the responsibility to individual sports bodies.

That status quo may be changing.

“On the protection of the female category, it was very clear from the members that we have to protect the female category, first and foremost,” Coventry told a journalist. “We have to do that to ensure fairness. But we need to do that with a scientific approach and with the inclusion of the international federations who have already done a lot of work in this area.”

The new IOC president said that she will quickly work to “bring in the experts” and international federations to find “cohesion on this specific topic.”

RELATED: ‘Male’: Leaked medical report alleges women’s boxing champ Imane Khelif has XY chromosomes

Coventry was faced with a similar question later on in the presser, with a reporter asking if cheek swabbing to determine sex was the likely scenario in order to protect women’s sports.

The executive said the IOC would look at the work that has been done by organizations like World Athletics and come up with an answer through “scientific approaches.”

The same reporter then asked specifically about how much Khelif’s case had affected the decision and if it had a heavy influence on Olympic Committee members.

Coventry said that the Olympic Committee “unanimously” felt it was time to find a consensus on how to protect women’s sports. She then noted that she had heard from many members about how the issue has played out in their own countries. This included members taking issue not only from a competitive standpoint but also a cultural one, Coventry explained.

RELATED: I played against the best, but never a man. Here’s why.

PARIS, FRANCE – AUGUST 10: Yu Ting Lin of Team Chinese Taipei celebrates a victory against Julia Szeremeta of Team Poland (not pictured) after the Boxing Women’s 57kg Final match on day fifteen of the Olympic Games Paris 2024 at Roland Garros on August 10, 2024, in Paris, France. (Photo by Richard Pelham/Getty Images)

“I’m very encouraged to see Coventry stating that she will protect the female category,” Jennifer Sey, a former U.S. national gymnastics champion, told Blaze News. “I’d only add that there really is no nuance. And there can be no compromise on this. It’s very simple. You must [have] XX [chromosomes] to compete in the women’s category. Sex testing — one time! — will verify this.”

While the new IOC president did fall short of plainly stating men should not be in women’s sports, if any policy similar to that of other athletic institutions is implemented, it should stop athletes like Khelif from competing against women.

Still, with Khelif daring President Trump in March to stop him from competing at the 2028 games in Los Angeles and attempting to compete against women as recently as May, the boxer may end up going down swinging, along with many other hostile male athletes.

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

​Fearless, Olympics, Women’s sports, Transgenderism, 2026 olympics, Woke, Sports 

The director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation has one job above all: Tell the truth. The FBI’s motto — “Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity” — demands it. But beyond the moral and professional imperative, the director has a legal duty when communicating with Congress. Former Director Christopher Wray failed that duty. On Thursday, the Oversight Project submitted a criminal referral to the Department of Justice and FBI, calling for an investigation — and prosecution if warranted.

The case against Wray centers on two major failures.

Transparency matters, but accountability is what the American people demand.

First, U.S. Customs and Border Protection intercepted 20,000 scannable fake driver’s licenses produced by the Chinese Communist Party. The licenses were part of an election interference scheme aimed at boosting mail-in ballots for Joe Biden in 2020. Current FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino confirmed this in recent disclosures to Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), noting that prior FBI leadership “chose to play politics and withhold key information from the American people.” Wray had to have known. He testified repeatedly that the 2020 election was secure. That was a lie.

Second, Wray misled Congress about the FBI’s so-called “Catholic memo.” He claimed it came from a single Richmond office and had been withdrawn. But new documents show the FBI circulated over a dozen related files to more than 1,000 employees and even drafted a broader version for wider circulation. As Grassley put it, “[Wray] is lying, and he ought to be followed up. Because if people that lie to Congress aren’t held accountable, it encourages more people to lie.”

The Oversight Project’s referral highlights three key moments when Wray gave sworn testimony contradicted by documented evidence. In September 2020, appearing before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, he denied any coordinated voter fraud effort. In March 2021, he flatly repeated his claim that foreign interference posed no threat — despite growing evidence suggesting otherwise. Yet Wray received regular briefings from Nikki Floris, head of the FBI’s 2020 election security and Foreign Influence Task Force. He acknowledged China’s malign influence campaign as early as July 2020. That alone undercuts his claims of ignorance.

The idea that Wray didn’t know about either scandal doesn’t hold water. Either he knew and lied — or he didn’t want to know. In both cases, that’s disqualifying.

And Wray’s record doesn’t earn him the benefit of the doubt.

He dismissed Antifa as an “ideology,” despite clear evidence of coordinated violent activity across multiple cities. He created the Foreign Influence Task Force that censored speech protected by the First Amendment — flagging the Hunter Biden laptop story and labeling credible sources as conspiracy theorists. He unleashed unprecedented FBI resources to pursue low-level January 6 offenders while ignoring real threats from abroad.

Under Wray, the bureau chased Republicans over flimsy allegations and turned a blind eye to millions flowing from Communist China to the Biden family. He rewarded agents who knelt for BLM while punishing whistleblowers who questioned the bureau’s politicization.

RELATED: The FBI was completely correct to keep an eye on Catholics

jnatkin via iStock/Getty Images

He effectively turned Pride Month into Pride Years, flooding the agency with DEI and LGBTQ propaganda instead of focusing on mission-critical tasks like national security and counterintelligence.

The FBI under Wray mocked its legal obligations — not just to Congress, but to the public. The bureau continues to fight in court to block the release of documents that would confirm its abuse of power.

Wray’s legacy is a textbook case of weaponization: Act aggressively when evidence hurts the political right, and bury it when it implicates the left. His repeated failures to disclose vital election-related information — and his lies about targeting Catholic Americans — expose a deeper pattern of deception.

The Oversight Project’s criminal referral gives the Justice Department and the FBI a chance to restore trust. Transparency matters, but accountability is what the American people demand.

And this case is only the beginning. We believe Wray and others at the FBI participated in a broader conspiracy to violate Americans’ civil rights. Investigating that conspiracy should begin with one simple act: prosecuting Christopher Wray.

​Opinion & analysis, Christopher wray, Antifa, Catholic memo, Domestic surveillance, Federal bureau of investigation, Fbi, Criminal referral, Oversight project, Joe biden, Donald trump, Kash patel, Dan bongino, Chinese communist party, Perjury, Lying to congress, Hunter biden laptop, Censorship, Dissent 

On June 25, following House passage and pending Senate review, White House Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought addressed the Senate Appropriations Committee and defended the $9.4 billion rescissions package that will slash misleading and wasteful foreign aid.

Vought couldn’t have been more frank about how taxpayer dollars were being spent overseas and highlighted how the most revolting causes were nefariously hidden behind program titles intentionally designed to conceal the truth.

Pat Gray, BlazeTV host of “Pat Gray Unleashed,” impressed by Vought’s candor, plays the clip of his blunt testimony.

“It is critical that this body and the American people writ large understand that many foreign aid programs use benevolent sounding titles to hide truly appalling activity that is not in line with American interest,” he said, before listing several examples.

“Under the guise of so-called preventative care within PEPFAR program [The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief], Americans have been funding the following: $5.5 million to LGBTQ advocacy in Uganda, $800,000 for transgender people, sex workers, and their clients in Nepal; $3.6 [million] for LGBTQ activism, free training in pastry cooking, psychosocial counseling, a cyber cafe, and dance focus groups for male prostitutes in Haiti; $1.1 million to produce gender transformation in diverse social and behavior change report, which advocates against ‘gender blindness.’”

“Most Americans would be shocked and appalled to learn that their tax dollars — money they thought was going to medical care — was actually going to far-left activism, population control, and sex workers,” said Vought, reassuring that legitimate “life-saving treatment” would not be impacted by the rescissions package.

But he wasn’t done listing out the so-called humanitarian programs that received American tax dollars.

“Other examples of the type of spending proposed for rescissions are almost comically wasteful,” he continued. “For example, complex crisis funding money went to voter ID in Haiti; development assistance funding has been used for net zero cities in Mexico, electric buses in Rwanda, and cricket powder in Madagascar.”

“Global health money went to the International Planned Parenthood Foundation and UNFPA,” other funds “went to social media mentorship in Serbia and Belarus,” and “the Clean Technology Fund was used for wind farms in Ukraine,” he continued.

“The American people didn’t fund this; they didn’t intend to at least. … The American people voted for change. President Trump stands ready to put our fiscal house back in order and put the American taxpayer first,” he concluded.

“Wow, that is stunning,” says Pat.

To see the footage of Vought’s testimony and hear more of Pat’s commentary, watch the video above.

Want more from Pat Gray?

To enjoy more of Pat’s biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Pat gray, Pat gray unleashed, Blazetv, Blaze media, Russell vought, Omb director, Omb, Usaid, Rescission package, Foreign aid 

On Friday, the Supreme Court upheld Texas’ common-sense law requiring pornography websites to verify the ages of their users and confirm that they are not children. This monumental ruling is key to protecting children from the dangers of the pornography industry. The cost of early exposure to pornography is high, and children deserve better than to be subjected to the violence and degeneracy of this industry.

In the legal world, pornography has often been characterized as a question of “free speech.” Indeed, the very name of this court case was Paxton v. Free Speech Coalition, referring to the group that challenged Texas’ law mandating age verification.

This decision reinforces the important truth that the rights of children come before the desires of adults.

But the FSC doesn’t advocate for heterodox campus speakers, whistleblower protections, or even the right to supposed “hate speech.” It’s a porn lobby.

Porn is big business, and its target consumers are kids. How do we know? Because in the handful of states that have passed age verification laws, some porn platforms have withdrawn altogether, preferring to lose their customers who are 18 to 88 rather than their customers who are 8 to 18.

My nonprofit Them Before Us filed an amicus brief in the Paxton case. We argued that today’s pornography — free, anonymous, unlimited, violent, and degrading — is particularly dangerous to children. The Supreme Court acknowledged that threat in its ruling.

“With the rise of the smartphone and instant streaming, many adolescents can now access vast libraries of video content — both benign and obscene — at almost any time and place,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the court’s opinion.

Our brief offered the justices a peek into what child or adolescent users might accidentally stumble upon if the FSC had prevailed. Hint: This isn’t your uncle’s Playboy.

We included a screenshot of the PornHub homepage, the most popular internet porn site. To keep with decorum, we redacted/blocked 90% of the nine video thumbnails and much of the titles as well. The content may have been too shocking for adult justices, yet it is easily accessible to a 9-year-old. To make sure there was no confusion about the “violent, body-punishing, and cruel” portals that were just a click away, we listed the popular pornographic categories on which kids could click, including babysitter, bondage, cartoon, gang bang, hentai, old/young, rough sex, school, and step fantasy.

Free speech this is not.

We don’t need to wonder whether or not kids are accessing this content. A decade ago, researchers found that the average age of first exposure to pornography was between 12 and 13. That was ten years ago, before the average age of first-time cell phone users dropped to 12 years old. Many kids can and do access pornography at a much younger age, and the average middle schooler has immediate, and often secret, access to endless hours of violent and disturbing sexual content.

Those in the so-called free speech camp have long argued that protecting children from adult material is the responsibility of parents, not the porn distributors themselves. But is that realistic, effective, or even possible in today’s internet landscape?

As Justice Alito openly pondered during oral arguments, “Do you know a lot of parents who are more tech-savvy than their 15-year-old?”

Filtering and parental controls rarely offer sufficient protection. In addition, children who are already socially disadvantaged, such as those raised in single-parent homes, spend more time on screens than their peers, increasing the likelihood of coming across harmful content.

Research confirms what common sense tells us: Pornography is bad for kids.

Children who are exposed to pornography before the age of 12 are significantly more likely to engage in “problem sexualized behaviors” — including attempts at imitating the sex acts they have witnessed. In addition, pornography is addictive, triggering the same kind of brain reward that leads to gambling addiction and even hard drug abuse.

And if 35-year-old, fully formed brains are being rewired by pornography, how much more so 15-year-old brains that are still developing?

No. Porn is not a “free speech” issue. It is a child protection issue. And it’s not something that parents can manage themselves.

It looks like the highest court agreed. States can and should be involved in creating obstacles between children and the sexual content that we know can harm them for life.

When adults put children first, good policy results. This decision reinforces the important truth that the rights of children come before the desires of adults. This ruling not only upholds Texas’ law protecting children online but also paves the way for other states’ laws to hold the pornography industry accountable for harming children online.

​Children, Porn, Pornography, Protect children, Supreme court, Xxx, Culture 

President Donald Trump threatened U.S.-Canada trade talks on Friday over the northern nation’s digital services tax, which required foreign and domestic large businesses such as Netflix, Amazon.com’s Prime Video, and Spotify to pay a levy of 3% on revenue earned from offering online services to users in Canada.

“We have just been informed that Canada, a very difficult Country to TRADE with, including the fact that they have charged our Farmers as much as 400% Tariffs, for years, on Dairy Products, has just announced that they are putting a Digital Services Tax on our American Technology Companies, which is a direct and blatant attack on our Country,” Trump noted in a Truth Social post.

“They are obviously copying the European Union, which has done the same thing, and is currently under discussion with us, also,” continued the president. “Based on this egregious Tax, we are hereby terminating ALL discussions on Trade with Canada, effective immediately.”

‘Canada is a very tough country to deal with.’

Canada — the top buyer of American goods, importing $349.4 billion last year, and 75.9% of whose total exports went to the U.S. — made abundantly clear that it wasn’t too attached to the tax, which the Parliamentary Budget Office estimated would increase federal government revenues by over $5.2 billion over five years.

Within hours of Trump’s post, the Department of Finance Canada announced that it was rescinding the digital services tax to advance broader trade negotiations with the United States.

Canadian Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne noted that “rescinding the DST will allow the negotiations to make vital progress and reinforce our work to create jobs and build prosperity for all Canadians.”

U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick thanked Canada on Monday for removing the tax, noting that it was “intended to stifle American innovation and would have been a deal breaker for any trade deal with America.”

RELATED: Canada’s solution to reliance on US? Increasing commitments in Europe

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

“In our negotiations on a new economic and security relationship between Canada and the United States, Canada’s new government will always be guided by the overall contribution of any possible agreement to the best interests of Canadian workers and businesses,” said Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney. “Today’s announcement will support a resumption of negotiations toward the July 21, 2025, timeline set out at this month’s G7 Leaders’ Summit in Kananaskis.”

The Canadian Liberal Party under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau first promised the tax ahead of the 2019 federal election, saying it would “make sure that multinational tech giants pay corporate tax on the revenue they generate in Canada,” even though critics indicated that Canadian consumers would end up paying the taxes.

The Digital Services Tax Act went into force on June 28, 2024, prompting condemnation stateside as well as an official complaint under the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement from former U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai.

John Dickerman, vice president of the Washington, D.C.-based Business Council of Canada, suggested to Canadian state media days after Trump’s re-election that the tax was likely doomed.

“The first Trump administration … was very clear on digital services taxes. They believed that digital services taxes were a very clear indication that a country was specifically targeting the U.S. and targeting U.S. companies. It will be a ‘with us and against us’ scenario,” said Dickerman. “I think there will be very little room for negotiation on DST.”

Trump leaned on Canada to axe the tax just in the nick of time. The first payments were due on Monday and retroactive to 2022, meaning a number of American corporations were on the hook for billions of dollars.

The Canadian government indicated that Carney and Trump have agreed to resume negotiations “with a view towards agreeing on a deal by July 21, 2025.”

“Canada is a very tough country to deal with, I will say that,” Trump told Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures.” “Hopefully we’ll be fine with Canada. I love Canada. Frankly, Canada should be the 51st state.”

Blaze News has reached out to the White House for comment.

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

​Canada, Canadian, Digital services act, Donald trump, Trump, Trade, Business, Tax, Taxation, 51st state, Mark carney, Carney, Politics 

Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) just failed — again — in their bid to ram through the Credit Card Competition Act, a sweeping regulatory proposal that would overhaul the U.S. credit card system to resemble Europe’s heavy-handed financial regime. Their latest attempt to sneak the measure into a stablecoin bill collapsed under scrutiny, marking yet another setback for legislation that critics say would harm consumers, weaken data security, and empower retail giants.

This outcome is welcome but unsurprising. The bill is wildly unpopular with consumers — for good reason. As written, it’s a thinly veiled giveaway to big-box retailers at the expense of virtually everyone else. Its sponsors claim it would inject competition into a noncompetitive market.

Senate leadership clearly got the message. Americans don’t want to fix something that isn’t broken.

In reality, the CCCA would allow retailers to continue accepting name-brand credit cards while processing payments through lesser-known networks — all without consumer knowledge or consent. Lawmakers should stand firm against any future efforts to resurrect this awful proposal.

The central premise of the bill — that the credit card market lacks competition — is unfounded. As of 2025, 152 companies in the United States issue credit cards. Between 2020 and 2025, market entry has grown at an average annual rate of 8.1%. This kind of steady growth does not indicate a broken market, but rather a dynamic and competitive system that continues to serve consumers well.

Kiss rewards goodbye

If passed, the CCCA would jeopardize that progress. Fraud rates, already on the rise, would skyrocket. Unvetted payment processors would be handed vast troves of sensitive consumer data. The only beneficiaries of using these cheaper alternatives are the retailers, who lack a vested interest in cardholder safety. Meanwhile, smaller institutions — including community banks and credit unions — would see revenue streams dry up.

RELATED: SCARY: President of European Central Bank admits ‘digital Euro’ is ready for launch

dem10 via iStock/Getty Images

Retailers insist these alleged “cost savings” would trickle down to their customers. That’s about as likely as the claim that businesses absorb tariffs or taxes without raising prices. History suggests otherwise.

Worse still, the bill would also end the ability of banks and credit unions to operate popular credit card rewards programs. These programs are funded largely by the interchange fees charged by payment processors. When Durbin succeeded in passing his debit card price controls, consumers lost card benefits and experienced no savings. A Wall Street Journal article highlighted this history:

Debit-card rewards programs have nearly disappeared since the Durbin amendment, part of the 2010 Dodd-Frank law that cut retailers’ fees nearly in half. Stores didn’t pass the savings to customers, while the banks that issue the cards found other ways to recoup revenue.

A failed Trojan horse

Like a one-trick pony, Durbin and Marshall have not given up — despite the bill neither gaining traction nor receiving a committee markup. As they have done previously, the senators once again tried to tuck their proposal into a “must-pass” bill. Their first target in the 119th Congress was the GENIUS Act, a bipartisan bill focused on stablecoin regulations. Thankfully, Senate leadership saw right through this ploy.

Polling confirms that Americans are largely content with the current credit card marketplace. In fact, 77% of respondents trust credit card companies to handle key responsibilities, such as fraud prevention. Three-quarters of respondents trust that their private payment networks will handle the protection of personal data. The poll also showed that 79% of cardholders use rewards cards, and more than half (58%) use those rewards regularly. Rewards are a tool many families and businesses rely on to make purchases while also earning cash back.

Senate leadership clearly got the message. Americans don’t want to fix something that isn’t broken — which is why they rightly rejected the addition of Durbin’s credit card mandates to the GENIUS Act.

Consumers can breathe easier

It is a relief the bill didn’t slip in as an amendment with no opportunity for debate. Any legislation with sweeping financial implications deserves full congressional scrutiny — and the voices of constituents must be heard. Still, Durbin and Marshall are reportedly eyeing the National Defense Authorization Act as their next legislative vehicle.

Taxpayers must remain vigilant to hold their representatives accountable. Policymakers must also be vigilant in defending the interests of their constituents. But for now, millions of Americans can breathe a sigh of relief.

​Opinion & analysis, Credit card, Credit card competition act, Dick durbin, Roger marshall, Stablecoins, Genius act, Congress, Competition, Fraud protection, Fraud, Hacking, Community banks, Credit union, Consumer protection 

Drive through our country’s heartland — past golden fields, cattle-speckled hills, and humming dairies — and you’ll see the soul of America at work. But look closer, and a bitter truth emerges: The hands harvesting our crops and milking our cows are too often foreign-born laborers here illegally or on a costly visa program.

In my state, the Idaho Dairymen’s Association admits a staggering 70% or more of dairy workers are using phony documents — illegal labor propping up Idaho’s top commodity and our country’s No. 3 milk-producing state.

Today, we’re fed a line that Americans have gone lazy, addicted to cubicles or city lights. Nonsense.

We’re told Americans won’t do these jobs. Really? From the 1880s through the 1940s, Americans built these very industries. So what changed? It’s not the workers. It’s the bosses who stopped believing in them.

American grit built our farms

Idaho’s dairies, ranches, and construction sites can thrive with American grit — if employers stop making excuses and start making offers.

Go back to the late 19th century, when Idaho’s Snake River Valley was raw desert. Local settlers — farmers, laborers, families — dug canals, built dams, and turned dust into fields of potatoes and alfalfa, as historian Mark Fiege shows in his 1999 book “Irrigated Eden.” These weren’t hired foreigners; they were Americans, mostly Western settlers, whose sweat and cooperation built an agricultural empire through the Depression and wartime into the 1940s.

Those were hard years. Yet, these people showed up, sleeves rolled, ready to work. They weren’t too soft for the sun on their necks or the ache of a long day.

Employers abandoned American workers

Today, we’re fed a line that Americans have gone lazy, addicted to cubicles or city lights. Nonsense. Some yes, but fewer than imagined. The problem isn’t our people; it’s an industry that’s forgotten how to call them home.

Don’t tell me Americans won’t work. Plenty of us still hunger for the kind of labor that smells of earth and steel — jobs that build calluses and communities. Idaho’s fields offer purpose: the roar of a tractor, the precision of robotic milkers, the quiet triumph of a harvest under wide skies.

Vice President JD Vance nailed it when he sarcastically gave in to the notion that deporting tens of millions of illegal aliens will send us back to 1960 — when homes apparently couldn’t be built without illegal labor. Absurd! The same goes for agriculture.

RELATED: Glyphosate 101: What you need to know about America’s most popular pesticide

Anton Skripachev via iStock/Getty Images

These aren’t dead-end gigs; they’re the backbone of our nation. But employers need to stop acting like foreign workers are the only option. If you are one of these employers who show up to the town parade waving Old Glory, singing Lee Greenwood’s “God Bless the U.S.A.” — if you claim to be America First — then hire Americans first. Anything less is just talk.

Illegal workers cost more

Here’s where the elites squirm. As state Rep. Stephanie Mickelsen (R-Idaho) noted during a House debate, Idaho employers often admit that foreign labor isn’t even cheaper. Visas, travel, lodging, meals, and transportation add up — often rivaling what an American might earn in salary and benefits. Yet, they claim no amount of money will lure American workers.

Have they tried? Really tried? Take those bloated costs — every dime spent on foreign logistics — and pour them into wages, health plans, or housing for locals. Build training programs to teach kids how to run today’s high-tech rigs. If tech giants can sell college grads on coding in Silicon Valley, Idaho’s dairies can sell our youth on feeding America.

It’s not rocket science. It’s will.

The same elites twist unemployment numbers to prop up their narrative. They cite low jobless rates to argue that no one’s left to hire. But the Bureau of Labor Statistics excludes a key group: able-bodied men ages 25 to 54 who’ve dropped out of the workforce entirely. They’re not working, not looking, and not counted. That forgotten group alone includes an estimated seven million Americans.

Make American farming great again

Picture this: billboards across Idaho showing a young farmer steering a drone-guided planter, grinning like he owns the future. Community colleges partnering with ranchers to train veterans and high schoolers. County fairs where dairies hand out scholarships — not just milk samples. That’s not fantasy. That’s strategy. Businesses that want loyalty don’t wait for workers to show up — they go find them.

Right now, 70% of dairy workers rely on falsified papers. That’s not a workforce. It’s a failure of imagination. Legal, local labor builds trust, strengthens communities, and proves we take sovereignty seriously.

Idaho can lead the way. America’s watching.

Employers, quit hiding behind old excuses. Redirect your budgets, roll out campaigns, and watch Americans answer the call. Lawmakers, reduce or eliminate regulations that incentivize foreign labor.

Neighbors, cheer these jobs as the honorable work they are. Picture our fields alive with Americans, dairies humming with citizens who know this land as home.

That’s not just Idaho’s future, it’s America’s. We’ve done it before. We can do it again. All it takes is the guts to try.

​Opinion & analysis, Opinion, Farmers, Farming, Agriculture, Idaho, Build back better, Illegal immigration, Jobs, Jobs americans won’t do, Mass deportations, Costs 

Just down the road from my house, a pastor was crucified in his bed — crown of thorns and all.

That’s not the start of a horror movie. It’s the real story of Pastor William Schonemann of New River Bible Chapel in Arizona. His murder in May received almost no media coverage until last week, when the suspect not only confessed to the killing but admitted he had plans to assassinate four more pastors in Arizona — and others across the country.

As a pastor who lives not far from where this happened, I couldn’t help but wonder: Was I on his list?

If the killer had cited Christian teachings while attacking a Planned Parenthood activist or drag performer, Los Angeles would be on fire and the Palestinian flag would fly from city hall.

The motive? The suspect claimed to be on a divine mission to “purify Israel” of anyone who teaches that Jesus is the Son of God. His logic was as deranged as it was deadly: You can’t kill the Son of God — so Jesus isn’t the Son of God. Therefore, anyone who says otherwise must die. He targeted pastors who preach that God forgives repentant sinners through Christ.

In other words, he hunted Christians.

This wasn’t an isolated attack. Just last week, a deacon in Michigan stopped a would-be shooter from opening fire inside a church. Whether through violence or through the daily pressure campaign of soft totalitarianism from elected leftists — who impose radical gender and social ideology — Christians face growing persecution in America.

RELATED: Nigerian Christians face latest massacre by militant Muslims

Getty Images

So here’s the question: Will these attacks on Christians be prosecuted as hate crimes?

U.S. law defines a hate crime as violence motivated by bias against a protected class. Religion qualifies. A man confesses to murdering a pastor because he preached the gospel. That’s not just homicide — it’s a textbook hate crime.

Crickets instead of courage

So where’s the outrage?

The answer is simple. We’ve allowed a media and university culture to take root that treats Christianity not just as wrong — but as evil. Christians, they insist, stand in the way of liberation, especially sexual liberation. The man who murdered Pastor Schonemann didn’t need a gender studies degree to absorb the worldview pushed by most public universities and entertainment platforms.

LGBTQ centers, DEI bureaucracies, and entire academic departments teach students that Christianity is repressive, outdated, and harmful. Professors tell them Christians cannot be victims of oppression because Christians are the majority. We must be decolonized, dismantled, or disappeared.

Curriculum has consequences.

Most people never enroll in Gender Studies 401, but they absorb the ideology from those who do. Graduates of these programs run media outlets, direct Netflix specials, and draft corporate policy. So when Amazon Prime pushes queer identity as liberation, the implied message is clear: Christian morality is the enemy. And when that message gets repeated often enough, unstable people act on it.

A chilling double standard

Now imagine the reverse. Had the victim belonged to a different religion — particularly one deemed “marginalized” or “indigenous” — CNN would run wall-to-wall coverage. MSNBC hosts would cry on air about America’s hatred. The Justice Department would announce investigations before the body cooled.

If the killer had cited Christian teachings while attacking a Planned Parenthood activist or drag performer, Los Angeles would be on fire and the Palestinian flag would fly from city hall.

But Pastor Schonemann preached Christ crucified. And so, the outrage is muted.

Time to act

Calling out this double standard matters, but it’s not enough. Pointing fingers at leftist hypocrisy only gets us so far. It’s time for action.

First, Christians must expose the incoherence of the ideologies used to justify this persecution. These movements promise justice but cannot define it. They claim to liberate, yet they demand conformity and submission. As a philosophy professor, I’ve challenged my own university’s faculty to debate these ideas. So far, silence. But shining light on the hollowness of their worldview creates space for the truth — and for grace.

Second, Christians must stop funding the institutions that despise us. Public universities are not neutral. They’ve become temples of anti-Christian dogma. Professors hide behind “academic freedom,” but the Constitution does not require taxpayers to bankroll propaganda. We must say: “No more. I won’t pay you to teach my child to hate the truth.”

After the murder, Pastor Schonemann’s son noted that the media seemed more interested in the killer than in his father’s life and witness. He’s right. And when the media finally does speak, don’t be surprised if it’s to ask: “Why do Christians deserve this?”

Universities are not neutral

Years ago, I sat on a panel at Harvard Law School. It was just before the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling. One panelist — an Ivy League professor of some renown — smiled and said, “Christians like to be persecuted, so let them be.” The audience applauded. No one flinched.

It’s time for Christian parents to wake up. The age of the “neutral” university has ended. Our children are not just being taught to tolerate different views — they are being indoctrinated to hate what is true, good, and beautiful. They are told in no uncertain terms: Christianity is the problem.

Until we demand equal protection under the law — and stop funding our own cultural executioners — the attacks will continue.

The killer in Arizona refused dialogue. He chose violence to silence the truth. Ask yourself: How different is that from the message preached by DEI activists and gender ideologues who say we must either conform or disappear?

They’ve told us exactly what they believe. It’s time we take them at their word.

​Opinion & analysis, Christian persecution, Arizona pastor, Arizona pastor crucified, Crucifixion, William schonemann, Murder, Persecution, Anti-christian, Universities, Ivy league, Obergefell v. hodges, Crime 

American cattle rancher Shad Sullivan is sounding the alarm on the “war on beef” that the elites are waging against the American people, and Blaze media co-founder Glenn Beck is right there with him.

“This is all coming from elites,” Glenn tells Sullivan. “85% of elites and super elites — super elites are ones that went to Ivy League colleges and have a doctorate. Just the elite are making $150,000 a year, they’ve gone to college, have one postgraduate degree, and they’re involved in the companies or countries.”

“They just did a poll on those people. Eighty-plus percent say that Americans should not be allowed to eat beef or meat of any kind,” he continues.

“We have to remember what Klaus Schwab said in 2023 at Davos. He said, ‘You will enjoy meat as a treat, but not for sustenance,’” Sullivan agrees. “And we know beef is really the only animal that can provide total and 100% sustenance to human life.”

“These elite that you talk about, I hearken back to my dad. He’s gone now, but he was a self-made rancher. Started with nothing,” he continues. “I said, ‘Dad, what are we going to do?’ And he says, ‘Son, we’ll never change America until they sit in the dark, cold and hungry.’”

“And that’s the truth. And he came from a place of suffering, so he understood that,” he adds, noting that the elites will never understand the kind of suffering that makes them grow.

“I think about somebody on the side of the road with a flat tire. Those elites couldn’t even change a flat tire. They couldn’t do the most simple things that require real life, and here they are, demanding and dictating how we’re going to produce and consume, not only in America, but across the world,” Sullivan explains.

However, there is one thing that keeps the elites from all-out rule over the American people.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Video, Sharing, Video phone, Free, Camera phone, Upload, Youtube.com, The glenn beck podcast, Glenn beck, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Shad sullivan, Cattle rancher, Global elites, Agriculture, Farming, Red meat, Elites against meat