Rep. Cory Mills (R-Fla.) is in the primary fight of his life after a string of scandals have damaged his public profile.

With Primary Election Day just days away, Mills has already lost the support of one of the most popular Republicans in his state: Gov. Ron DeSantis.

‘Earning only 28% support as an incumbent should already be extremely concerning to Mills.’

On Friday, DeSantis was speaking at a press conference at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University when he was asked about the 7th Congressional District, which Mills currently represents. DeSantis made his thoughts about Mills abundantly clear:

“I have not endorsed Cory Mills, and I do not support Cory Mills,” DeSantis replied.

Mills’ office did not respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.

RELATED: Rep. Cory Mills under investigation AGAIN — this time from the DOJ

Recent polling shows that many of Mills’ constituents seem to agree with DeSantis. A Victory Insights poll released last Friday reveals that Mills holds about a 6% lead over challenger Ryan Elijah, 28.3% to 22%, and the poll even classified the race as “Lean – Ryan Elijah.”

“Mills is in trouble, not just with the law, but also with the voters of District 7,” the Victory Insights polling analysis read. “Earning only 28% support as an incumbent should already be extremely concerning to Mills.”

The analysis pointed to Mills’ recent legal troubles, the unified support behind Elijah, endorsements for Elijah from other members of the Florida Republican congressional delegation, and the undecideds souring on Mills as other reasons for Mills to panic.

Still, Mills has at least one strong Republican ally in his corner: President Donald Trump. Back in February, Trump endorsed Mills’ re-election bid, calling Mills “an America First Patriot and Tremendous Champion for the Great People of Florida’s 7th Congressional District!”

As Blaze News has reported at length, Mills has been accused of stolen valor, converting to Islam, and even of threatening to release revenge porn of ex-girlfriend Lindsey Langston, a former Miss United States.

A few weeks ago, news broke that the Department of Justice had opened an investigation into Mills, though the nature and scope of the investigation is unclear. Some reports indicate that it relates to Mills’ finances.

The primary election in Florida is Tuesday, and early voting has been underway for days.

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

​Cory mills, Ron desantis, Donald trump, Florida, Politics 

After the birth of her second child, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt has made the decision to leave the White House — however she will remain one of his top outside advisers.

“It’s not that surprising when she just had another baby,” BlazeTV host Pat Gray says on “Pat Gray Unleashed.”

“All of those mothering instincts start kicking in and then they’re not doing their job all of a sudden. And that’s exactly what happened,” he adds.

And she will be missed, particularly by President Trump.

In a post on Truth Social, he wrote: “Our wonderful White House Press Secretary, and one of my most trusted aides, Karoline Leavitt, will be departing her role at the end of the month so she can spend more time with her beautiful young children and family, a decision I totally understand and respect!”

“Karoline will now be one of my top outside advisors, and an influential voice within the Republican Party, as we work to defy History, and conclusively win the Midterm Elections. Karoline has been a real leader in the White House, and has done a phenomenal job fighting for Justice, Liberty, and Freedom, since 2018, including our Historic Re-Election Campaign of 2024. Karoline has been one of the best White House Press Secretaries in the History of the Office,” he added.

“Not that many people can stand up to the press like Karoline Leavitt. So good at it. Really good. Young, smart, looked good in her position. And now she’s gone,” Gray says.

However, Kris Cruz points out that the truth might be a little messier.

“The word on the street is there was an argument on Marine One a couple nights ago where her and Trump got in a heated argument,” Cruz explains.

“In a leaked video from last night, she looks visibility isolated during a tense Marine One exchange with Trump and another woman. Hours later, she’s out,” Cruz reads from a post on X, which shows the video.

“She does not look happy,” executive producer Keith Malinak comments.

“Well, she’s missing her babies,” Jeff Fisher adds.

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.

​Donald trump, Karoline leavitt, Marine one, Maternity leave, Pat gray, Truth social, Blazetv show 

U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro has announced criminal charges against a woman who allegedly vandalized the World War II monument in D.C. and posted video of herself apparently in the act.

Pirro noted her personal interest in the charges against Melissa Farris in a statement released Friday about the vandalism.

‘Our beautiful World War II Memorial was just hit. … Where do these animals come from???’

“Vandalizing our World War II Memorial is a despicable attack on a sacred monument honoring the Americans who fought and died for our freedom. Those Americans include my father and grandfather,” said Pirro in a post on social media.

Farris allegedly spray-painted messages on the memorial in pink paint and also allegedly put a sudsing agent into the waters of the fountains. “I’m here. I done did it,” she appears to brag on video.

“Clean hands Dirty $” was the message scrawled in spray-paint, WJLA reported.

Pirro went on to say that Farris was charged in a federal district court with depredation against the property of the United States as well as destruction of veterans’ memorials.

President Donald Trump noted the vandalism in a post on Truth Social.

“Our beautiful World War II Memorial was just hit by Spray Painting Vandals,” he wrote Friday morning. “THERE CAN BE NO GREATER INSULT TO THOSE AMERICAN HEROES WHO DIED IN WORLD WAR II. First the Reflecting Pool, now this. We are on their trail! Where do these animals come from???”

The president linked the war memorial vandalism to the damage allegedly done to the new lining that was sprayed into the reflecting pool at the Lincoln Memorial. Pirro dropped charges against a man accused of damaging the lining, claiming that contractor errors were to blame for the damage.

RELATED: Swastika and racial slur found on fence at elementary school in SoCal town

Trump was reportedly furious at Pirro, who blamed the debacle on Interior Sec. Doug Burgum.

Farris could face up to 10 years in prison if convicted, according to Pirro.

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

​Crime, Donald trump, Jeanine pirro, Social media, Vandalism, World war ii, Politics 

The 911 operators of New Orleans are not happy about what they are calling irresponsible journalism.

The conflict stems from a report that accused the emergency service providers in the city of using artificial intelligence — instead of humans — to respond to emergency calls.

‘No, New Orleans 911 is NOT replacing humans with AI.’

The article in question was originally titled “New Orleans will use AI to answer 911 calls instead of a human,” from the Shreveport Times.

The outlet said the Orleans Parish Communication District, which handles emergency and public safety calls for the city, was testing out a new tool to reduce the intake volume for dispatchers.

Citing “over a thousand emergency calls a day,” the paper stated that while the AI was originally implemented in April for non-emergencies, the AI is now answering 911 emergency calls for Louisiana’s largest city.

In response, the OPCD called the report “extremely misleading & inaccurate, and “containing numerous errors of fact.”

A press release from the organization titled “No, New Orleans 911 is NOT replacing humans with AI,” refuted the claim that officials are exchanging staff members for artificial intelligence and offered an explanation for how their “AI call-triage” tool works.

That’s where the automated responses come in.

OPCD said that when all operators are busy and a 911 call comes in from within 200 meters of an already-reported incident, the AI tells the callers they have reached New Orleans 911 and asks if they are calling about the same case.

RELATED: Surveillance pricing is here — and this surprising state is saying NO

Don Juan Moore/Getty Images

“If the caller responds with anything other than ‘YES’ (in any language), they are returned to the 911 call queue to speak with a human,” the organization wrote.

If the caller does say “Yes,” the AI tells the caller that the incident is already known and that if the caller is involved or has further information to stay on the line. The call is still logged and the normal audio and data still recorded, the OPCD stated.

Although OPCD described the story as “irresponsible,” the Louisiana paper’s description of the program was seemingly not as egregious as one would imagine. The Times described the triage as a system that assesses incoming calls to provide immediate feedback to callers.

“This is intended to handle the increase of calls that are related to one incident,” the Times said.

RELATED: Infamous cyberattackers claim their next shocking victim — using a decades-old trick

Jung Yeon-je/AFP/Getty Images

In fact, the outlet outright stated that the AI “will not be used to handle emergency calls, only to direct such calls to a human dispatcher.”

One discrepancy was that the program had started in just April, but OPCD said it has been in use since the fall of 2023.

Nonetheless, OPCD said the Shreveport Times failed to properly fact check its “incredibly inflammatory story,” while labeling such acts “irresponsible” and “unprofessional.”

Following the OCPD’s complaints, the Shreveport Times has updated its article and title. The article now reads, “New Orleans hoping limited AI use could speed response for emergencies,” with the following note:

The original version of this story did not meet our editorial standards. We are conducting a thorough review and implementing immediate measures to strengthen our process. We regret the error and any distress it may have caused. This story will be updated as additional facts or information warrant.

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

​Artificial intelligence, 911, 911 dispatch, New orleans, Louisiana, Tech 

The Democrats’ plot to seize control of the U.S. Senate may not get any help from the voters in Michigan if the latest polling results hold until Election Day.

Republican Mike Rogers has a narrow lead over Democratic nominee Abdul El-Sayed, but other results in the Fox News poll show some strength on the left that may show up at the ballot box.

‘El-Sayed being down by that 4-point margin is the weakest that any Democrat has polled at this point in a Senate race this entire century.’

Fifty-one percent of respondents back Rogers while only 47% say they are voting for El-Sayed, but that lead is within the poll’s margin of error.

However, Democrats are much more interested in voting in the election generally, to the tune of a 15-point advantage over Republicans.

El-Sayed was able to defeat establishment candidate Rep. Haley Stevens in the Democratic primary by 1% despite polling showing that she competed better against Rogers.

CNN election analyst Harry Enten found that El-Sayed’s support is historically low among Democrats vying for the U.S. Senate.

“El-Sayed is significantly weaker than these other Democrats who are running, and I will also note, I went back, and I tried to find every single poll I could find at this point in previous Michigan Senate campaigns in the 21st century,” he said. “I believe that El-Sayed being down by that 4-point margin is the weakest that any Democrat has polled at this point in a Senate race this entire century.”

Political science professor Robert Shapiro of Columbia University says Democrats should be encouraged by the poll despite the narrow Rogers lead.

“First, it’s an encouraging sign that he is not trailing badly in the polls given how he is readily painted as an extremist and vehemently anti-Israel,” Shapiro said to Newsweek.

RELATED: El-Sayed PURGED more than 100 YouTube videos expressing FRINGE beliefs — and they have resurfaced

“It is trite to say it but true that the election will be all about turnout,” he added. “Turnout of the MAGA base and anti-leftist Republicans versus a fired up Democratic voting base that is fed up and angry with how they see Trump and his Republican congressional lackeys have not only failed to perform effectively on the inflation and affordability front, but have made things worse overall with the misguided war against Iran.”

El-Sayed is the first Muslim to be nominated for a seat in the U.S. Senate.

Rogers sailed into the Republican nomination unopposed after previously serving as a congressional representative for Michigan and losing a U.S. Senate race in 2024.

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

​Democrats, Us senate, Michigan, Abdul el-sayed, Muslim, Politics 

The biggest threat facing the West, says BlazeTV host Nick Freitas, is much bigger than wokeism.

“Wokeism is more of a smoke screen for something much more dangerous and much more comprehensive,” he says.

What is fueling progressivism and America’s growing wave of democratic socialism is an insidious ideology called “third worldism” — the framework that divides the world into Western “oppressors” and Global South “victims” with the explicit goal of decolonizing and dismantling the West.

Europe, Freitas explains, “planted the seeds” of third worldism decades ago, and today we’re watching the horrific fallout.

“I don’t say this hyperbolically: Europe may already be lost,” he says.

The United States, however, still has time — but not much. The signs that we are catapulting toward the same demise are more abundant than most realize, Freitas explains.

“What I think a lot of people don’t seem to understand is that when you actually look at the total number of democratic socialists that have been elected to local, state, or federal positions within the United States, it’s actually far larger than people think,” he says, noting that there are currently “about 250 elected officials.”

“Americans need to understand this, because they think it’s isolated to a couple of pockets of just crazy insane blue districts, and it’s not. It’s far more pervasive,” he adds.

But what’s perhaps more disturbing is the DSA’s stated goals on its website.

“When you look at the DSA website, when you look at what they’re actually advocating for, you actually see the same language that is used by third worldists,” says Freitas. “DSA’s own international committee explicitly organizes around global solidarity and anti-imperialism — not domestic wokeism.”

But what does that actually mean?

It means, Freitas reads from the DSA website, “the full decolonization of all occupied lands of the United States, self-determination and full sovereignty for Hawaii; Puerto Rico; [American Samoa]; [Guam]; Northern Mariana Islands; Virgin Islands; and to all indigenous nations whose ancestral lands are within current U.S. borders; as well as to the independence to [sic] all overseas territories and dependencies controlled, occupied, or otherwise exploited by the USA.”

In other words, they “don’t want the United States to exist,” says Freitas, explaining that the DSA’s objective is “not really to get everything back the way it was” but to “to destroy and undermine the West.”

But the terrifying part is that the DSA is downplaying its radicalism in order to gain popularity and power.

“When Mamdani went on to Jon Stewart’s show and said that socialism is basically just Social Security and public libraries … but then you look at the language that he uses or the organizations he associates with, and it becomes very clear,” says Freitas. “They want the dismantling of the United States.”

To hear more, watch the episode above.

“Making the Argument with Nick Freitas” is available on BlazeTV+, YouTube, and major podcast platforms.

Start watching Nick Freitas NOW at blazetv.com and use the promo code NICK40 for $40 off your BlazeTV+ subscription.

​Nick freitas, Democratic socialism, Zohran mamdani, Third worldism, Blazetv show 

Faced in recent years with accusations of racism, Greater Manchester Police — like other law enforcement institutions in the United Kingdom — embraced DEI in the extreme, not only prioritizing race and ethnicity as factors in its hiring decisions but setting racial quotas.

The force, whose chief constable denies the existence of two-tier policing and anti-white animus on the force, was met this week with yet another reminder that diversity is not their strength.

‘The victim is our priority.’

Mohammad Hassan, a 23-year-old student officer in training at GMP described as “of Asian-Pakistani ethnicity,” was arrested in West Yorkshire over the weekend and charged on Monday with rape and other crimes.

According to the GMP, officers received a call at 10:18 p.m. on Saturday “where a woman could be heard to be in distress in a vehicle in the Manchester area.” Police tracked down the vehicle — but when they approached, the driver fled.

The suspected driver was later identified as Hassan, who was “off-duty” at the time and driving “his personal vehicle,” GMP said. He was arrested “on suspicion of kidnap, rape, and dangerous driving.”

Ewan Cooper, a senior crown prosecutor, alleged during a hearing on Tuesday at the Stockport Magistrates’ Court that on the night of the rape, Hassan drove at speeds of up to 120 mph.

After a high-speed chase down the M62 highway, police finally stopped and arrested Hassan.

RELATED: ‘Beyond evil’: Nightmarish report reveals full scale of mass Islamic rapes of ‘250,000’ white British girls

ANDREW YATES/AFP/Getty Images

Hassan has been formally accused of oral rape, kidnap, strangulation, sexual assault, theft of mobile phone, and dangerous driving.

Assistant Chief Constable Mark Dexter said in a statement, “The victim is our priority, and we are ensuring she continues to receive specialist support. Criminal proceedings must now take its course without interference.”

“I understand, and share, the feeling among the public and our thousands of hard-working, decent staff who will have seen this news,” continued Dexter. “Proceedings are underway and necessary action will be decisively taken within the regulations.

Dexter added that the GMP’s Professional Standards Directorate conducted a review and found that Hassan’s “vetting was completed without any reason for concern.”

The Pakistani trainee, who did not enter a plea this week, has been suspended and has been referred to the Independent Office for Police Conduct for an investigation. He is due in Manchester Crown Court for a hearing on Sept. 15.

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

​Greater manchester police, Police, England, Rape charges, Pakistan, Politics 

A coach in the Little League World Series delivered a speech on the mound on Wednesday that is being labeled the greatest of all time.

During a West Region tournament game between Arizona and Hawaii, Arizona had a 2-1 lead in the top of the fourth inning. That’s when Coach Drew Breivogel visited his pitcher on the mound.

‘This is a baseball game, right?’

Little League teams from across the globe compete every year to become world champions, and the pressure can be overwhelming for many of the young players, who are all ages 10 to 13 years old.

Pitcher Camden Burke of Chandler National Little League in Arizona seemed to be feeling the heat when Breivogel came to speak to him. What happened next was unexpected.

“I’m so proud of you. I’ve known you since you were 8,” Breivogel said, as ESPN microphones picked up his comments. “Not a lot of people get to see the fruit of the labor that you put in, right?”

The coach went on, “Remember Zacchaeus in the Bible? Someone planted that tree 30, 40 years prior so he could climb up into it. Salvation — we’re talking salvation. This is a baseball game, right?”

In an effort to help the young player relax, the coach seemed to be letting Burke know there are more important things in life than the outcome of the game.

“If you walk the next five guys, Jesus is still Lord,” Breivogel continued.

“If you strike out the next five guys, guess what: Jesus is still Lord. Okay? I love you. Have some fun,” he concluded.

A post that showed the exchanged labeled the coach’s speech “the greatest [Little League] mound visit of all time,” and had already been viewed more than 10 million times at the time of this writing.

RELATED: Texas pastor issues two challenges for men today: ‘Putting it into action bears fruit’

Although Burke had the lead, he was already 82 pitches into his night, a lot for even a major league hurler. This no doubt had an effect as Kawaihau Community Little League of Hawaii scored four runs in the inning.

Neither team scored in the remaining innings, and Hawaii took home the victory, 5-2, eliminating Arizona from the tournament.

The speech was not without controversy, however. Several responses criticized the coach for not talking strategy or offering the boy pitching advice.

“How about a scouting report?” Tim Earle replied, suggesting the coach should have given “some advice about mechanics.”

RELATED: ‘She didn’t wait until it was easy’: Victim of brutal injury from male athlete praises Sophie Cunningham

Dylan Buell/Getty Images

Another widely viewed remark accused the coach of “using TV to make himself look good [.] He knew he was Mic’d up, that was his BIG moment.”

Although the coach received a lot of support, detractors of his speech were split between those who found it to be inappropriate for the situation and those who preferred the coach to dish out strategy during his time at the mound.

Neither the coach nor the player has addressed the memorable moment.

Hawaii will play Southern California in the West Region championship Friday at 9 p.m. ET. The winner will advance to the elimination tournament.

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

​Baseball, Christianity, Faith, Arizona, Hawaii, Sports 

BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey went head-to-head with progressive political commentator Monte Mader in a wide-ranging Jubilee debate over abortion, feminism, same-sex marriage, and the role of Christianity in American public life.

Mader approached the debate as a critic of the conservative Christian worldview she once embraced, while Stuckey defended her positions from a biblical Christian perspective.

‘Christians … have the right and the responsibility to bring the fullness of our worldview into the public square, into the voting booth.’

The hour-long “Face Off” centered on four claims: whether Christians must oppose abortion, whether patriarchy or feminism is at odds with Christ’s teachings, whether Christians can affirm same-sex marriage, and whether America can rightly be considered a Christian nation.

Across all four subjects, the debate repeatedly returned to a larger disagreement: What authority should Scripture have over Christian moral beliefs, and how much influence should those beliefs have in American public life?

Abortion and personhood

The debate opened with Stuckey’s claim that “Christians must oppose abortion.”

Mader challenged that position by pointing to disagreements over abortion throughout Christian history and arguing that bodily autonomy should allow a woman to decide whether to continue a pregnancy.

Stuckey rejected the idea that historical disagreement determines whether abortion is morally permissible.

“I’m really not interested in all of the people throughout church history who were wrong about a number of things,” Stuckey said.

“My argument is that killing an innocent person is always wrong.”

For Stuckey, the critical issue is personhood. She argued that drawing the line anywhere after conception creates an arbitrary standard for determining which human beings have rights.

“I think the morally safest, and of course the biblically safest too, position is to say, ‘You know what? All human beings no matter how small, no matter how young, no matter their location, are people that have rights,'” Stuckey said.

Mader countered by repeatedly returning to bodily autonomy, arguing that the life developing in the womb does not supersede the rights of the woman carrying it.

RELATED: Paxton intervenes to help save surrogate baby from abortion

Courtesy Jubilee

Feminism, patriarchy, and the role of women

The second section centered on Mader’s contention that “patriarchy, not feminism, is at odds with Christ’s ministry and teaching.”

The two agreed that Jesus elevated the dignity of women and that Christianity should not be used to excuse abuse. Their disagreement centered on whether biblical distinctions between men and women inherently create inequality.

Stuckey described herself as a traditional complementarian and affirmed the teaching in Ephesians that husbands and wives have distinct roles. Mader argued that complementarianism can create unequal power structures, particularly when churches reserve spiritual authority for men.

The disagreement eventually returned to abortion and why Stuckey believes many Christians reject modern feminism.

“We disagree on abortion being a civil right, and that is exactly why you see the demonization of feminism because your equality boils down to the right to kill your child inside the womb,” Stuckey told Mader.

Can Christians affirm same-sex marriage?

The third portion produced perhaps the debate’s clearest theological divide.

Stuckey argued that Christians cannot affirm same-sex marriage as morally good while remaining consistent with Scripture. She also distinguished that claim from questions about how government should regulate marriage.

“My claim is not even about the legislation of same-sex marriage,” Stuckey said. She argued instead that it is not “biblically viable” for a Christian to support the idea that same-sex marriage is “moral and good and right and holy.”

Mader challenged Stuckey’s interpretation of Scripture, pointing to different forms of marriage found in the Old Testament and noting that Jesus’ comments about a man and woman becoming one flesh came in response to a question about divorce.

Stuckey later clarified that she was not claiming Christians who affirm same-sex marriage cannot be saved.

“You can’t be a Christian and affirm same-sex marriage and be correct,” she said, adding that all Christians will ultimately discover they held incorrect beliefs about some theological questions.

Stuckey cited Genesis, Jesus’ teachings, Romans 1, 1 Corinthians 6, and Ephesians 5 in defending marriage between a man and a woman as the consistent biblical model.

Should Christian beliefs influence American law?

The final section moved directly into the relationship between Christianity and America.

Mader argued that America is “not and will never be a Christian nation,” defining Christian nationalism as the belief that the country is fundamentally Christian and that government should promote Christian identity and values through civil life and legislation.

Stuckey agreed that America has no established national religion and affirmed the principle of separation of church and state. She rejected, however, the idea that Christians should be expected to separate their worldview from their politics.

“It’s impossible to create a law outside of a moral worldview,” Stuckey said.

She argued that every voter brings moral assumptions into political decisions and that Christian beliefs should not be uniquely excluded from the public square.

“Christians also have the right and the responsibility to bring the fullness of our worldview into the public square, into the voting booth,” Stuckey said.

Mader countered that religious freedom also requires protecting Americans from having another person’s religious convictions imposed upon them through government.

The discussion eventually returned to abortion and gender, with Mader arguing that progressive positions can be grounded in science and data rather than religious doctrine. Stuckey disputed the idea that progressive politics involve a neutral, worldview-free position.

“Either everyone can bring the fullness of their worldview into legislation and we duke it out and see what wins, or no one can,” Stuckey said.

RELATED: Texas pastor issues two challenges for men today: ‘Putting it into action bears fruit’

Courtesy Jubliee

A deeper disagreement over biblical authority

The biggest divide of the debate was not any single political issue. It was the authority each side believes Scripture should have over those issues.

Mader challenged conservative Christian interpretations of the Bible from outside the faith tradition she once embraced, often appealing to historical context, bodily autonomy, civil liberties, and modern understandings of science and sexuality.

Stuckey repeatedly returned to Scripture as authoritative for Christians, even when its teachings conflict with prevailing cultural beliefs.

That disagreement carried directly into politics. Mader argued that separation of church and state should prevent religious convictions from being imposed through law. Stuckey countered that no political movement legislates from a worldview-free position and that Christians have the same right as anyone else to bring their convictions into the public square.

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

​Abortion, Allie beth stuckey, Christianity, Christian nationalism, Faith, Politics 

Former Vice President Kamala Harris, the 2028 presidential front-runner, recently criticized the SAVE America Act because it would require people to prove their citizenship when registering to vote.

Well, yes.

Sometimes the strongest argument for legislation comes from the people trying to defeat it.

Requiring someone to establish that he is a U.S. citizen before being added to the voter rolls is not some hidden provision critics just uncovered. It is the point of the bill.

The SAVE America Act would require documentary proof of U.S. citizenship before registration for federal elections. Harris meant that as an indictment. Supporters see it as the safeguard at the heart of the legislation.

Recent events are making the distinction harder to dismiss.

Last month, the Department of Homeland Security warned election officials in California, New Jersey, Nevada, and Pennsylvania that tens of thousands of noncitizens appeared on state voter rolls.

Less than a week later, New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill (D) acknowledged that roughly 6,600 noncitizens had been registered because of what she called a “software glitch.”

Calling it a software glitch may explain how it happened. It does not answer the more important question: Why did the system allow it to happen at all?

New Jersey does not prove that every state has the same problem, and an erroneous registration is not the same thing as an illegal vote. But it does demonstrate the basic case for prevention rather than cleanup.

How long did the vulnerability exist? Why was it not caught sooner? And why should states wait until ineligible registrations occur before verifying eligibility?

The New Jersey episode becomes even more revealing because lawmakers had already spotted the weakness.

In May, state Sens. Jim Beach (D) and Kristin Corrado (R) introduced bipartisan legislation intended to prevent New Jersey’s Motor Vehicle Commission from prompting people to register to vote after they had already indicated they were not U.S. citizens.

Think about that for a second.

The software glitch did not invent the vulnerability. It exposed a problem legislators were already trying to fix. That is precisely why supporters of the SAVE America Act want safeguards at the front end of registration, before election officials are left explaining how ineligible names reached the rolls.

As Texas Public Policy Foundation Chief National Initiatives Officer Chuck DeVore wrote in “How to Ensure That Only Citizens Vote,” “When non-citizens vote for any reason, citizens’ votes are diluted and thus disenfranchised.”

RELATED: The SAVE America Act cannot save this electorate

Bill Pugliano/Getty Images

The argument is not that eligible Americans should face needless obstacles. It is that citizenship should be established before someone is placed on a federal voter roll, protecting the weight of every lawful ballot.

That position is hardly outside the mainstream.

A recent Fox News poll found that 83% of registered voters favored requiring photo identification to register and 77% favored requiring it to cast a ballot.

Most Americans appear to regard verification as a reasonable expectation, not an extraordinary burden. Which makes the Democrats’ position even stranger.

Earlier this year, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Democrats support voter ID.

Then came the vote. Senate Democrats opposed Ohio Republican Sen. Jon Husted’s voter ID bill, which would have required voters to present valid identification before receiving a ballot in federal elections.

So what exactly do they support?

The debate has become almost comically inverted. Critics say proof of citizenship goes too far. Democrat leaders say they support voter ID. Then, when a voter ID requirement reaches the Senate floor, they vote against it.

Meanwhile, New Jersey has supplied a real-world example of what happens when verification comes too late.

Kamala Harris meant to make the case against the SAVE America Act. Instead, she described exactly why its supporters want it.

The contradiction now extends well beyond Harris: Democrats say they support verification while opposing the mechanisms designed to perform it.

Sometimes the strongest argument for legislation comes from the people trying to defeat it.

​Kamala harris, Opinion & analysis, Save america act, Voter registration, Department of homeland security, Citizenship, Democrats, Voter fraud 

Actor Hugh Laurie was quick to respond to recent accusations about his views on men playing in women’s sports.

While Laurie’s popular character on his hit show “House” was highly sarcastic, Laurie wasn’t joking around when it came to this controversial idea. However, his initial remarks only confused readers who were ready to jump to his defense.

‘You started it.’

Tit for tat

It all started when Laurie posted some statistics about the “broigus” in professional basketball.

“99.9% of the world are, effectively, ‘women,'” Laurie wrote. Adding that “an American man between 20 and 40 years of age and 7 feet tall or more, there’s a 17% chance you’re already in the NBA.”

There was no shortage of replies from X users that interpreted Laurie’s comment as meaning that he supports ungendered sports categories, an argument mirrored by scientist Neil deGrasse Tyson in recent years.

This included writer Graham Linehan, who wrote, according to Grok, “You don’t have to ACTUALLY be House to say this is unfair and wrong. Or maybe you do.”

Laurie was quick to vehemently put any assertions to bed.

“Firstly, f**k off,” the actor replied. “Secondly no, I don’t believe men should compete against women. I thought I’d made that pretty clear. If you’d looked.”

That wasn’t the end though.

RELATED: WNBA gives awful update after meeting to establish gender eligibility rules

Arch enemy

Linehan not only asked why Laurie was so hostile if he agreed, but he suggested that the actor, “Just say that you support Sophie Cunningham in her fight for fair sports and stop trying to be arch.”

Laurie made it clear, “Yes, I support Sophie Cunningham. And you, some of the time,” he told Linehan.

As for the unpleasantries, Laurie simply stated, “You started it.”

“‘Cowardly’ to ‘f**k off’ is the going rate of exchange around here,” Laurie explained, definitively.

As mentioned though, Linehan was not the only person to read into Laurie’s comments as being a sign he has the exact opposite beliefs he later espoused. To the 67-year-old’s credit, he took time to kindly respond to many accusations.

RELATED: WNBA team co-owner FINED and SUSPENDED for cursing out teen fans of Sophie Cunningham at Seattle game

Scott Humbert/NBCU Photo Bank/NBCUniversal/Getty Images

Vodka thoughts

“It was just an observation — not even mine — about that particular sport,” Laurie told one reader.

“It was an observation, that’s all. Carry on,” he said in response to another critique.

Laurie gave a more pointed response to a woman who said she had interacted with him over a review of his show in the past. The woman went on to point out more immutable characteristics that differentiate men and women.

It was when speaking to her that the actor said that his point was being made by “my vodka bottle,” and he was simply trying to assert that basketball has “a single characteristic — greater than any other sport I can think of.”

“I just find that amazing,” he added. “I also find it amazing that no one else finds it amazing.”

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

​Hugh laurie, House, Transgenderism, Women’s sports, Entertainment