Alabama police announced murder charges against the mother of a missing toddler on the birthday of the girl, who would have turned 3 years old.

Adrienne Reid reported the child missing on Feb. 16 from their apartment on Apache Drive, according to a Facebook post from Enterprise police. They said they determined she was lying and arrested her the next day.

‘A 53-day campaign of deceit, lies, manipulation, and destruction of evidence.’

“Through the careful and methodical work of investigators, we have reached the heartbreaking and horrific conclusion that … her mother, her caretaker, the one that should have been there to keep her safe, willfully murdered Genesis and placed her in a duffle bag and discarded her in a dumpster,” Enterprise Police Chief Michael Moore said.

Moore said police believed that the girl had not been since Christmas Day, and they were able to obtain video from a neighbor’s security camera that showed the mother walking toward the garbage dumpster of the complex with a rolling duffel bag at about 11:30 p.m.

The next day, she was seen on video returning to the dumpster with toys and other belongings of her daughter.

The Coffee County Sheriff’s Office is tasked with searching for the girl’s remains at the Coffee County Landfill.

“I need the public to understand that this will not be an easy or fast search,” Coffee County Sheriff Scott Byrd said.

“The subject dumpster where the bag we are looking for was picked up on December 26. It was compacted in the truck that picked up it,” he explained. “It was taken to a distribution facility and compacted again. It was taken on another truck to the landfill where it was processed further with bulldozers and a compacting machine.”

Coffee County District Attorney James Tarbox excoriated the mother in a statement about the case.

“The evidence shows that Adrienne Reid killed her daughter, literally threw her in the trash, and then engaged in a 53-day campaign of deceit, lies, manipulation, and destruction of evidence, before she finally reported her missing on February 16,” he said.

RELATED: Teen girl went missing after going to meet 51-year-old at boarded-up pink cinder-block home — police later find severed leg

“Her conduct speaks for itself, and I believe this preliminary decision to seek the death penalty conforms to our community’s beliefs about this case and our shared values about how we value and seek to protect the most innocent among us, our children,” Tarbox concluded.

Moore concluded the press conference by saying his faith provided some solace while confronting the alleged evil perpetrated on an innocent child.

“I believe that Genesis’s earthly body is no longer what defines her, and that she is now in a place far greater than anything this world could offer, surrounded by a love and power beyond our understanding,” he said.

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

​Death of genesis reid, Adrienne reid kills daughter, Mother kills daughter, Enterprise infanticide, Crime 

After months of public back-and-forth, Netflix’s bid for Warner Bros. Discovery is dead. Paramount won. The company on February 26 said it had completed its purchase, and Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr said regulators would approve it “pretty quickly.”

Some observers blamed Netflix’s loss on the Trump administration. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) labeled the Paramount deal a “disaster,” and allies implied that administration officials leaned on Netflix to stand down.

Netflix profits when audiences stay home. Theaters, restaurants, and the broader ecosystem built around going out don’t.

That’s revisionist history. Netflix lost for two reasons: Paramount offered more money, and Republicans have grown far less willing to wave through consolidation by mega-firms that already squeeze consumers and tilt the culture war leftward.

Paramount outbid Netflix

Start with the obvious. Netflix offered a little over $27 per share. Paramount offered $31 per share — roughly $111 billion in total value.

Netflix couldn’t match that price. Paramount could. Netflix walked.

That’s math, not corporate intrigue.

Why Washington had concerns

Money explains why Netflix lost. Politics explains why so few people in Washington felt inclined to rescue it.

Carr said Netflix’s bid raised “a lot of concerns.” President Donald Trump signaled skepticism. So did many congressional Republicans. They saw a company that already dominates streaming trying to turn itself into the dominant media conglomerate — and they saw the costs landing on consumers, creators, and competitors.

Consumers would have taken the hit first. As Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) noted during merger hearings, Netflix’s expansion has marched alongside higher prices. Subscribers pay more, then sit through more ads. The company pushes customers toward “cheaper” tiers that still interrupt programming people already bought access to watch.

Filmmakers would have taken the hit next. Director James Cameron warned that the sale would be “disastrous for the theatrical motion picture business.” Netflix profits when audiences stay home. Theaters, restaurants, and the broader ecosystem built around going out don’t.

RELATED: CNN’s biggest nightmare is one step closer to finally coming true

Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

Then comes culture. Paramount’s programming spans the spectrum. Nobody confuses it with a conservative company, but nobody defaults to treating it as a progressive messaging machine either. Its catalog ranges from right-coded “Yellowstone” to newer, openly left-wing “Star Trek” entries, with plenty of mainstream fare between.

Netflix plays a different game. Its board includes former Obama administration official Susan Rice. Critics on the right point to its content tilt, including an Oversight Project analysis that found left-leaning programming outnumbered right-leaning programming by a wide margin. Even Netflix’s CEO recently tried to walk back a 2020-era post supporting Black Lives Matter, a retreat that looked less like conviction than belated damage control.

Monopoly defeated

For years, conservatives answered complaints about corporate media with a libertarian shrug: Let the market decide. That posture collapsed once the market stopped functioning like a market. A handful of firms now gatekeep distribution, advertising, and cultural prestige. Consumer choice matters less when one company controls the pipes.

Netflix seemed to miss that shift. It still spoke like the scrappy upstart that crushed Blockbuster, not like the biggest player trying to swallow a legacy studio and reshape the entire ecosystem on its terms.

Netflix will survive. It will keep producing content, and it will keep pushing its worldview in much of that content. It just won’t do it with control over Warner Bros. Discovery — or over the broader media landscape.

​Netflix, Warner bros, Paramount, Monopoly, Media market, Corporate media, Discovery, Opinion & analysis, Donald trump, Antitrust, Woke culture, Woke hollywood, Reed hastings, Barack obama, Oversight project, Susan rice 

Fifteen years ago, when Glenn Beck was still working at Fox News, he issued a dire warning: “Radicals, Islamists, communists, and socialists will work together against Israel, against capitalism … to overturn stability.”

Are we seeing that prophecy come to fruition today?

On this episode of “The Glenn Beck Program,” Glenn addresses the recent New York City bombing attempt and connects it to his former prediction.

Last weekend, two men with possible ISIS ties were charged with terrorism-related offenses after allegedly attempting to detonate two improvised explosive devices at a protest outside Gracie Mansion, the official residence of New York City’s Muslim mayor, Zohran Mamdani. The incident occurred amid clashes between a group protesting the Islamification of New York City and a group of counter-protesters.

“But that’s not the troubling part of the story,” Glenn says. “The most troubling part is what happened afterward. The new mayor of New York condemned the protest itself as hateful and racist, but he avoided acknowledging the ideological context behind the attack on the other side.”

“At the same time, there are reports circulating that the mayor’s own wife had previously liked social media posts celebrating the October 7 Hamas attack against Israel,” he adds.

“Why does any of this matter?” Glenn asks.

Because “what leaders excuse or refuse to confront often becomes what a society learns to tolerate.”

“There is this growing ideological alliance between two movements that have historically had two very different worldviews: radical Marxism and radical Islamism,” Glenn says.

History, he argues, proves time and again that “when movements share the same enemy,” which in this case is “Western civilization” and everything it values, “a temporary alliance” will form between those movements, regardless of how conflicting their core ideologies.

The key word there is “temporary,” he says, as the union only holds so long as the enemy breathes.

Glenn gives the example of the Iranian Revolution of 1979 when Shia religious scholars banded together with “Marxists and communists and secular revolutionaries” — marching “arm-in-arm, hand-in-hand” to “destabilize Iran” and ultimately overthrow the shah.

But “once the Islamists consolidated power under the Ayatollah Khomeini, they turned on their former Marxist allies. The communists were imprisoned; the revolutionaries were purged. They were executed, and they were tortured,” Glenn recounts.

What we’re seeing right now in New York City, Dearborn, Minneapolis, and even parts of Texas (not to mention Great Britain and France) as Muslim radicals and far-left groups coalesce is more “red-green alliances” that will likely end “in one side eating the other,” he warns.

“Ideology matters because history shows that civilizations don’t collapse from a single attack. They collapse when they lose the ability to recognize the attack for what it is. Iran learned that lesson in 1979. Europe is learning it right now. And America is seeing the early warning signs.”

“The solution … is not hatred. … The solution is also not naive or stupid compassion,” Glenn says.

The answer, he says, is to “welcome those who come here to be Americans the right way, and remove those who came here the wrong way, and those especially who have come here to change or harm America.”

This equates to “deporting the individuals who openly support terrorism,” “refusing to tolerate violent ideological movements,” and “having the courage to discuss the problem honestly even when it’s uncomfortable.”

“The most dangerous moment any civilization ever faces is not when the extremists appear, because the extremists have always been here. … The most dangerous moment is when leaders and citizens convince themselves that speaking about the threat is worse than the threat itself,” Glenn says.

“It’s not too late to pull back on the reins, but it is growing late.”

To hear more, watch the video above.

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.

​The glenn beck program, Glenn beck, Zohran mamdani, Islamism, Marxism, Fall of the west, Blazetv, Blaze media, Blaze podcasts 

Many conservatives still treat the fall of Roe v. Wade as a decisive victory. The four years since have looked more like a warning.

States passed more pro-life laws. Abortion numbers still climbed as chemical abortions expanded. Republicans hold Congress and the White House, yet their best legislative win amounted to defunding Planned Parenthood for a single year — while Washington toys with expanding IVF mandates and even hints at becoming more “flexible” on the Hyde Amendment.

When the pro-life movement treats its own argument as too radioactive to say plainly, moderates still aren’t convinced — and the base stops listening.

The biggest losses didn’t come from legislatures. They came from voters.

Across the country, abortion-rights activists have used ballot initiatives to write a “right to abortion” into state constitutions. Once voters approve those amendments, courts use them to bulldoze state pro-life laws. The trend will continue unless the anti-abortion movement rethinks its messaging — fast.

Blue states predictably enshrined abortion rights. Red and purple states did too. Voters in Missouri, Montana, and Arizona backed abortion amendments. Colorado, New York, and Maryland did as well.

In 2024, abortion ballot measures passed in seven states and failed in three. Florida stopped an amendment only because state law requires a 60% supermajority. Nebraska rejected one by 51%. South Dakota defeated its measure with 59%. All three states backed President Donald Trump by larger margins than that.

Another wave of initiatives is coming this year. Nevada voters will decide whether to provide the second affirmative vote needed to add an abortion amendment they approved in 2024. Virginia, where Democrats control state government, will vote on an abortion amendment as well. Idaho voters may consider an abortion statute that lawmakers can later amend or repeal. Arkansas could vote on a measure to make the state constitution easier to amend, which would almost certainly tee up an abortion amendment fight soon after.

The pro-life movement keeps walking into these battles with a losing playbook.

Many pro-life groups center their messaging on women who get abortions rather than the babies murdered by abortion. They assume the issue primarily drives Democratic turnout. They want to “compete” by shifting to softer language about women’s health, hoping to win moderates on neutral ground.

That approach doesn’t persuade moderates, and it often fails to mobilize the pro-life base.

Take Arizona. The pro-life coalition opposing Proposition 139 called itself “It Goes Too Far.” One of its yard signs read: “Protect Women’s Health.” It didn’t even mention abortion.

Arizona voters re-elected Trump with 52% of the vote. They also approved Proposition 139 with nearly 62%. That’s the same margin New York voters gave their own abortion amendment.

RELATED: MAHA is sick: RFK’s FDA is drifting the wrong way

Jordan Vonderhaar/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Ohio followed the same pattern. Pro-life groups launched “Protect Women Ohio” to oppose Issue 1, which passed with nearly 57% of the vote in 2023. The messaging leaned on parental rights and transgender issues — as if linking Issue 1 to other debates would broaden the opposition.

Instead, the coalition blurred the point. Issue 1 appeared in an off-year election, one year after Roe fell. Progressive voters turned out. Conservatives stayed home.

Afterward, activists who knocked doors against Issue 1 told the same story: Pro-life voters felt confused. The campaign avoided the central issue, then wondered why the people most likely to vote against abortion never felt compelled to show up.

Abortion amendments raise other policy questions. They touch parental consent, conscience protections, and medical regulation. But the core reason to oppose them remains simple: Abortion murders babies. Pro-life messaging that refuses to say that out loud shouldn’t expect to win.

A blunt moral argument does two things that “women’s health” slogans don’t. It keeps the debate centered on what abortion is. It also activates the voters needed to defeat these measures — voters who will turn out when they understand their ballot could save lives.

Conservatives face a familiar temptation in a culture that punishes conviction: soften the message for short-term gains. Electoral politics requires prudence. It doesn’t require self-censorship. When the pro-life movement treats its own argument as too radioactive to say plainly, moderates still aren’t convinced — and the base stops listening.

If Republicans want to win ballot fights and build lasting cultural renewal, they need to speak with moral clarity. Until they do, they’ll keep losing these amendments — and babies will keep dying because of it.

​Abortion, Roe v wade, Abortion laws, Ivf, Pro choice, Right to choose, Right to life, State abortion laws, Opinion & analysis, Ballot initiative, The courts, Pro-life, Ohio issue 1, Proposition 139, Arizona, Messaging, Red states, Blue states