Monday, February 23, 2026
Home Blog Page 23

California reparations bills killed as Newsom sought to avoid appearing ‘too progressive’

By
-
0

Reparations activists in California hope their snubbed bills that were shelved in September will be re-introduced by a legislator during the next special session that Gov. Gavin Newsom called in January.

“That is one of the primary demands or commands from the community and reparations leaders is for a legislator, it doesn’t even have to be a black legislator, but a legislator to reintroduce those two bills that failed,” California Reparations Task Force Chair Kamilah Moore told Fox News Digital in an interview this week.

The bills, SB 1403 and SB 1331, would have established the California American Freedman’s Affairs Agency to oversee reparations programs and create a dedicated fund for implementing reparations policies, respectively. Both were snubbed after backers said the bills would not move forward and be signed by Newsom.

Black activists in California assembly

“I think the reason for Newsom was probably political, like, he didn’t think that these reparations would get so serious so fast,” Moore said. “And then this particular election year when Kamala [Harris] was running for president, and you can’t look too progressive in this political environment we’re in.”

The two bills, authored by members of the California Legislative Black Caucus, were pivotal for the reparations task force to carry out its atoning for what supporters said was a legacy of racist policies that drove disparities for Black people, from housing to education to health.

The Democrat-led California legislature passed a spate of other bills aimed at remedying past racial injustices, but none of them would provide direct payments to African Americans.

“I feel like the caucus and even Newsom were supportive of these bills, and there’s evidence of that. The Black Caucus wrote that letter in June wanting to give $6 million to their friends, the Black freedom Fund, which is problematic,” Moore said. “But the letter also said they wanted to give $6 million to the reparations agency, but then at the last minute, in August, they decided to kill the Reparations Agency Fund bill.”

Gavin Newsom

At the time, then-Sen. Steven Bradford, who is now termed out, said the bills didn’t move forward out of fear they wouldn’t make it past Newsom’s desk.

“We’re at the finish line, and we as the Black Caucus owe it to the descendants of chattel slavery, to Black Californians and Black Americans to move this legislation forward,” Bradford said, urging his colleagues to reconsider the bills.

When the bills got pulled, a group of protesters were outraged inside the Sacramento Capitol after being promised the bills would receive time.

State Republican Assemblyman Bill Essayli accused Democrats in a post on X of going “into hiding” and refusing to bring the bills up for a vote when it came time to pass them despite “promising to pay direct cash reparations to Americans who have been harmed by slavery” for years.

Essayli talked to supporters in the Capitol that day and clarified that he did not support California taxpayers paying for the wrongs of slave states but “believed there should be a debate and a recorded vote on the issue.” He then urged the legislature to bring the bills for a floor debate.

“I don’t think you can constitutionally justify cash payments based on race,” Essayli told Fox News Digital in an interview this week. “[President-elect] Trump created opportunity zones, which resulted in direct investments into minority communities, so I think there’s other [ways] we can get resources and investments to those who have been harmed by racist policies and slavery long ago.”

California Reparations

There are two new reparations bills on the California docket that were introduced during the Dec. 2 special session.

AB 7, introduced by Democrat Assemblymembers Isaac Bryan and Tina McKinnor, proposes allowing California’s higher education institutions, including the California State University, the University of California, independent colleges and private postsecondary institutions, to consider giving admissions preference to applicants who are descendants of American slavery.

AB 57, introduced by McKinnor, seeks to allot a portion of California’s Home Purchase Assistance Program funds for descendants of slaves.

Newsom has remained silent on most reparations bills introduced this year but approved a nearly $300 billion budget in June, which included up to $12 million for reparations. The budget did not detail which proposals the funds would support, and his administration has expressed opposition to some of the measures.

However, he signed some reparations-related bills, including a “formal apology for California’s historical role in the perpetuation of slavery and its enduring legacy.”

“The State of California accepts responsibility for the role we played in promoting, facilitating, and permitting the institution of slavery, as well as its enduring legacy of persistent racial disparities,” Newsom said in a statement in September. “Building on decades of work, California is now taking another important step forward in recognizing the grave injustices of the past – and making amends for the harms caused.” 

Fox News Digital’s Bradford Betz and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

 

Trump announces more nominations, including Kari Lake as director of Voice of America broadcast

By
-
0

President-elect Donald Trump nominated a few more candidates on Wednesday night to serve in various positions during his second term.

He tapped Kari Lake as the next director of the Voice of America, a state-funded U.S. government broadcaster. Lake was a longtime Arizona broadcaster who ran unsuccessfully for public office in 2022 and 2024.

“I am pleased to announce that Kari Lake will serve as our next Director of the Voice of America. She will be appointed by, and work closely with, our next head of the U.S. Agency for Global Media, who I will announce soon, to ensure that the American values of Freedom and Liberty are broadcast around the World FAIRLY and ACCURATELY, unlike the lies spread by the Fake News Media,” Trump wrote in a release.

Voice of America is an influential broadcast channel that provides news, information and cultural programming in over 40 languages on the Internet, mobile and social media, radio and television.

Kari Lake

Trump also named Dr. Peter Lamelas, a physician, philanthropist, and businessman, as the next U.S. Ambassador to Argentina. Lamelas immigrated to the U.S. from Cuba and founded MD Now Urgent Care in Florida, the state’s largest urgent care system.

“As a child, Peter and his family fled communist Cuba and LEGALLY immigrated to the USA, starting with nothing, and achieving the American Dream,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

Lamelas was previously appointed to the Department of Justice’s Medal of Valor Review Board during Trump’s first term and has served as a town commissioner in Manalapan, Florida, and on the state’s Board of Medicine.

Dr Peter Lamelas

Also on Wednesday evening, Trump announced Daniel Newlin, a law enforcement veteran and personal injury attorney, as the next U.S. Ambassador to Colombia. 

In addition to a 28-year career with the Orange County (Florida) Sheriff’s Office where he worked as a fugitive detective, Newlin is also a business executive and entrepreneur who founded Dan Newlin Personal Injury Attorneys – the second-largest firm of its kind in the country.

“With his Law Enforcement expertise enabling him to navigate complex international issues, and his business insights fostering economic partnerships, Newlin stands as a powerful advocate for U.S. interests, and a Champion for strengthening ties, and making a difference in the World,” Trump wrote.

Daniel Newlin website photo

The picks announced Wednesday night are the latest in a long string of nominations the president-elect hopes the Senate will approve.

 

How Trump can pull the plug on Paris climate accord and end this treaty for good

By
-
0

President Trump has vowed to once again extract the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement. Our entrance (both times) is dubious; but so are the impacts of the extensive contractual obligations required of the treaty’s signatories. 

The accord does little to advance U.S. interests and only serves to diminish our strength and national security. The removal process needs to begin on day one.

The Paris climate agreement is an international treaty aimed at limiting global temperature increases to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and committing to net zero emissions by mid-century. 

Obama Trump AP

Adopted by 196 parties at the U.N. climate change conference (COP21) in Paris, in December 2015, it went into effect the following November. Participating countries submit their national climate action plans, which should become increasingly ambitious every five years. 

Under our constitutional form of government, treaties are to be ratified by the Senate. President Obama, however, evaded such a review by merely calling it an executive agreement, for it surely would not have received the requisite two-thirds vote. But it is in fact a treaty; even the U.N. calls it such. President Biden simply followed Obama’s footsteps with an executive order to reenter.

A proposition of this magnitude deserves critical analysis and examination before enlisting our entire nation as a participant. Foregoing senatorial review undermines an essential component of the Constitution’s checks and balances.

The Paris Agreement threatens U.S. ability to self-govern, something most Americans value and cherish. We should not be beholden to the whims of international leaders with political agendas. Our elected officials have responsibilities to their constituents, not U.N. bureaucrats and foreign organizations.

U.S. energy policy needs to be derived from legislators who are voted into office by U.S. citizens. The climate accord instead compels our leaders to continually negotiate domestic energy policy with a coalition of external governments and institutions, all demanding that abundant and cheap carbon-based fuels be replaced with expensive and unreliable so-called green energy, namely wind, solar and electric vehicle technology. 

Striking at the heart of federalism, individual states are also essentially forced to cede their powers to the president who has taken control of their energy sectors. States should be free to navigate and implement what works best for their energy needs.

Several decades of climate policy both here and abroad have taught us a few things regarding the folly of such rash decisions.

Our European friends, who have implemented aggressive net zero policies and endorse the agreement, are experiencing the highest electricity rates in the world, shortages, and even deindustrialization. 

Germany’s production peaked in 2017 and has been in a state of decline ever since. High energy costs are often blamed. Britain too is suffering from ill-conceived climate initiatives. Some states in the U.S. who have individually adopted ambitious wind and solar portfolios are also witnessing skyrocketing electricity prices, blackouts and energy shortfalls.

The treaty functions on the premise that renewable energy is cheap and reliable, however, it is anything but that. Wind and solar are not low-cost substitutes for fossil fuels, nor can they provide the secure and stable energy Americans expect to run their households and businesses.

The treaty also serves as a transfer of wealth. Rich countries, largely held responsible as the greatest contributors to climate change, are expected to alleviate their guilt by pledging money into a fund that assists developing countries in mitigating its effects. But a severe lack of transparency, loose guidelines and lax reporting on the donated finances are raising questions. Some of the funds have been used for fossil fuel projects, airport extensions, chocolate shops and other economic ventures seemingly unrelated to climate issues.

Developing nations ought to be free to utilize the very resources that allowed wealthy countries to flourish. No nation ever became rich without the employment of fossil fuels. We should be partnering with poor countries to facilitate a rise out of poverty rather than further pushing them toward it with demands of a so-called transition to renewables.

Energy produced on U.S. soil is also among the cleanest in the world. Restricting production here prompts other nations with lax environmental standards and zero interest in the treaty to ramp up theirs. The effort simply becomes futile. 

The agreement assumes that a massive push toward net zero will miraculously slow the rate of global warming, but it will produce no detectable climate benefits. Instead, trillions will have been diverted from productive investments and put toward political purposes.

How American consumers power their economy should not be subject to the whims of any foreign entity.

 

The January 6 Prosecutions: Restricted Areas or Restricted Justice?

By
Shawn Witzemann
-
0

18 U.S. Code § 1752 and January 6 Prosecutions
The legal cases stemming from the January 6, 2021, Capitol breach have drawn intense scrutiny, particularly regarding the application of 18 U.S. Code § 1752. Originally designed to safeguard areas occupied by Secret Service protectees, this statute has been wielded as a legal sledgehammer against hundreds of individuals involved in the events of that day. Critics argue that its use raises significant legal and procedural questions, with implications for due process, enforcement standards, and constitutional rights. Spoiler alert: they’re not wrong.

Understanding 18 U.S. Code § 1752
This statute defines “restricted areas” as zones designated for the protection of individuals under Secret Service protection, such as the President or Vice President. These areas must be clearly marked and communicated to the public to ensure reasonable awareness of their restricted status. Translation: You can’t just slap a couple of signs around and call it a day.

Defense attorneys in January 6 cases have challenged whether these requirements were met. Evidence suggests that signage around the Capitol was sparse, vague, and lacked the formal language typically associated with Secret Service-designated areas. Furthermore, the Capitol Police and Secret Service seemed to be on different planets when it came to coordinating restricted area designations.

Attorney Roger Roots, representing some defendants, likened the situation to charging someone for speeding on a road with no speed limit signs.

“Without proper signage or notification, the application of § 1752 becomes legally dubious,” Roots argued. And honestly, he’s got a point.

Thousands gathered on January 6 for speeches and protests, only to find permits revoked mid-event and ambiguous signs scattered about like afterthoughts. Roots further compared the enforcement to “charging someone for entering a restricted area that wasn’t even properly designated as restricted.”

Courtroom Evidence and Testimony
Prosecutors have presented evidence like emails vaguely referencing Vice President Mike Pence’s presence and grainy photographs of signs to support the use of § 1752. Defense attorneys, however, argue these “receipts” fall far short of what’s required. Repeated requests for formal documentation designating the Capitol as a restricted area? Crickets.

Testimony from USSS Agent Lanelle Hawa, who is trotted out by the government for her testimony hasn’t helped clear things up either. It’s raised more questions than answers about the adequacy of preparations and the clarity of restricted area boundaries. Critics have accused the prosecution of cherry-picking evidence and leaning on overly rehearsed testimony. Or as Roots put it:

“The foundation for many of these charges appears built on quicksand.”

Ouch.

Insights from the January 6 Select Committee Hearings
The January 6 Select Committee hearings offered even more fodder for skeptics. The systemic failures in security planning and coordination were laid bare. Take this illuminating exchange between Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) and then-U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund:

Lofgren: “What about resources needed for arresting protesters?”
Sund: “It was a cite and release process with a $50 fine. Custodial arrests would require buses, and significant charges would be handled differently.”
Lofgren: “Was D.C. going to arrest people?”
Sund: “Yes.”
Lofgren: “What about potential threats after the count is done?”
Sund: “We were preparing for a long day.”
Lofgren: “Do we have floodlights to monitor areas?”
Sund: “Yes, we have that capability.”
Lofgren: “What about the status of the National Guard?”
Sund: “The National Guard could be activated with an emergency declaration from the board. They were a phone call away and ready if needed.”
Despite Sund’s reassurances, the lack of specific deployment numbers and minimal pre-planning made January 6 a logistical nightmare. Add in revoked permits and unclear signage, and it’s no wonder the day descended into chaos.

Welcome to Legal Fantasyland
Unlike when the Ungovernables greeted Trump at the Libertarian Convention—where the Secret Service went all out with proper signage and clear protocols—the Capitol’s restricted zones on January 6 were a joke. Permits for lawful gatherings were revoked on the fly, and the smattering of “No Trespassing” signs were about as useful as a “Keep Out” sign on a treehouse. Roger Roots called it out for what it was: a legal farce.

At the 2024 Libertarian National Convention, the Secret Service nailed it. Large, unambiguous signs referenced § 1752 and left no room for misunderstanding. If the government can get it right for a partisan political event, why not for January 6? The answer seems to be that clarity and fairness weren’t exactly high on the priority list that day.

Due Process? More Like ‘Do Whatever You Want
The bungled application of § 1752 isn’t just a bad look; it’s a symptom of deeper issues. Allegations of selective enforcement, withholding exculpatory evidence, and inconsistent application of legal standards have critics sounding the alarm. If the government can cut corners here, what’s stopping them from doing it again?

Roots describes the situation as “systemic malpractice,” citing cases of allegedly withheld evidence, tampered discovery files, and perjured testimony. The judicial process, mired in confusion and politicization, has become a spectacle—and not the good kind.

Representative Zoe Lofgren’s recent statement reflects the stakes: “It’s important for members of the committee to let him [Donald Trump] know: We will not be intimidated.” Sure, but at what cost? Justice shouldn’t come with an asterisk.

Rules Are Hard, Apparently
The January 6 prosecutions under § 1752 are a cautionary tale of what happens when laws are misapplied in the heat of political battles. The lack of proper signage, coordination, and clear evidence has exposed the cracks in the judicial system. Ensuring fairness and transparency is critical—not just for the defendants, but for the public’s trust in the rule of law.

As Roger Roots succinctly put it,

“If you’re going to prosecute people under § 1752, at least follow your own damn rules. Anything less is not just incompetence—it’s an affront to justice.”

Independent Journalism is needed now, more than ever. Support 1776Returns HERE.

‘Delusional’ AOC slammed for suggesting subway riders should be scared of Daniel Penny: ‘Utter stupidity’

By
-
0

Progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said New York City subway riders should be scared of Daniel Penny after he was found not guilty in the chokehold death of Jordan Neely — sparking swift backlash from straphangers who blasted the lefty lawmaker as “delusional.”

Penny, 26, was acquitted of all charges by a Manhattan jury Monday following the high-profile trial over the fatal, caught-on-camera encounter with the troubled homeless man on an uptown F train last year.

In a previous clip that has gone viral on X after the acquittal, Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) said Penny’s apparent lack of remorse could mean he could cause more violent incidents on the trains.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said NYC subway riders should be scared of Daniel Penny.
“If we do not want violence on the subways and the point of our justice system is a level of accountability to prevent a person who does not have remorse about taking another person’s life,” the progressive said, according to a clip posted on social media in the wake of the trial that has been viewed more than 540,000 times.

“I mean even people who have engaged in manslaughter or have taken a life accidentally express remorse,” she continued.

“The fact that a person has expressed no remorse indicates a risk that it may happen again. And if we do not want to unleash that level of violence then we should exert a level of accountability to prevent that from happening.”

Daniel Penny
Daniel Penny was cleared by jurors of criminally negligent homicide. Steven Hirsch for the nypost
Neely, 30, died after Penny, a Marine veteran from Long Island, held him in a chokehold for six minutes on May 1, 2023, after he began shouting at and threatening passengers on a crowded subway, frightening them.

Penny and other witnesses claimed Neely said he didn’t care if he went back to jail and that he was willing to kill.

Before the trial kicked off, Penny was asked by The Post whether he would do it again.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez sparked swift backlash from straphangers for her remarks. Nathan Posner/Shutterstock
He nodded and said, “I would — if there was a threat and danger in the present.”

Penny was cleared by jurors of criminally negligent homicide after the more serious manslaughter charge was dismissed by prosecutors last week after the 12 jurors deadlocked.

Straphangers quickly jumped to Penny’s defense, rebuking Ocasio-Cortez and labeling the Marine vet a hero.

“They should rename that the Daniel Penny line. The only safe subway in New York,” one person heralded on X.

“No honest person believes we need fewer people willing to step up and protect work and children from being assaulted on the subway,” another added.

“AOC never fails to surprise me with her utter stupidity!” a third blasted.

Luigi Mangione viewed UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson’s killing as ‘symbolic takedown’ of ‘parasitic’ healthcare industry: sources

By
-
0

Luigi Mangione believed killing UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson to be a “symbolic takedown” and “a direct challenge” to the healthcare company’s corruption and “power games,” according to law enforcement sources who have reviewed the alleged murderer’s manifesto.

Mangione, who had the three-page handwritten manifesto on him when he was busted at a Pennsylvania McDonald’s Tuesday, was likely driven to violence by his perceptions that the health care industry is “parasitic,” sources said.

Luigi Mangione
Luigi Mangione allegedly viewed Brian Thompson’s killing as a “symbolic takedown.” via REUTERS
Luigi Mangione, 26-year-old suspect in Brian Thompson's homicide, arriving at Blair County Court House for his arraignment.
Mangione, who had the three-page handwritten manifesto on him when he was busted at a Pennsylvania McDonald’s yesterday. via REUTERS
Surveillance footage showing a person of interest potentially linked to the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, outside the midtown Hilton Hotel.
Mangione, 26, may have found inspiration for his violence in “Unabomber” Ted Kaczynski. Obtained by NY Post
The alleged gunman criticized the US for having the “most expensive healthcare system in the world” and was upset watching profits of healthcare companies — which he described as “mafiosa” — continue to rise while Americans’ life expectancy lags behind other industrialized countries, sources said.

He views himself as a “hero” for killing Thompson, claiming in the document that he was taking on the healthcare industry with “brutal honesty,” sources said.

Mangione, 26, may have found inspiration for his violence in “Unabomber” Ted Kaczynski, the extremist luddite who terrorized the country for nearly two decades by mailing deadly bombs before he was nabbed in 1996.

Outgoing Sen. Joe Manchin pushes constitutional amendment for Supreme Court term limits

By
-
0
Sen. Joe Manchin, I-W.V., and Sen. Peter Welch, D-Vt., are proposing a constitutional amendment that would institute a term limit system for future Supreme Court justices.Currently, high court justices do not face constraints on the length of their service. They ” … shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour …” the U.S. Constitution states.

The proposed amendment would create 18-year terms, with new terms beginning every two years. But the term limits would only impact justices appointed after ratification — all current justices would still be able to remain on the bench as long as they wish.

“The proposed amendment would not adjust the tenure of sitting Justices, but rather institute a transition period to maintain regular vacancies as current Justices retire,” a Manchin press release explains. “During that period, 18-year terms will begin every two years, regardless of when a current Justice leaves the bench. Once a current Justice retires, the newly appointed Justice will serve out the remainder of the next open 18-year term. The amendment would not change the overall number of Justices on the Court.”

Manchin, a Democrat-turned-independent who has served in the Senate since late 2010, did not seek re-election this year.

Sen. Joe Manchin,
Sen. Joe Manchin, I-W.Va., is joined by staff just before delivering his final address as he prepares to retire from the Senate, at the Capitol in Washington. AP
His current term will end in less than a month.

“I’m proud to introduce this legislation with Senator Welch that would establish 18-year term limits for Justices of the United States Supreme Court. The current lifetime appointment structure is broken and fuels polarizing confirmation battles and political posturing that has eroded public confidence in the highest court in our land,” Manchin said, according to the press release. 

“Our amendment maintains that there shall never be more than nine Justices and would gradually create regular vacancies on the Court, allowing the President to appoint a new Justice every two years with the advice and consent of the United States Senate. I encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join our legislation to help restore faith in our judicial system.”

Justices of the US Supreme Court posethe term limits would only impact justices appointed after ratification — all current justices would still be able to remain on the bench as long as they wish. AFP via Getty Images

Sen. Joe Manchin,
Manchin, a Democrat-turned-independent who has served in the Senate since late 2010, did not seek re-election this year. AP
The proposed amendment stipulates that the high court should be comprised of nine justices, a figure which is not currently enshrined in the Constitution.

“The Judiciary Act of 1869 fixed the number of Justices at nine and no subsequent change to the number of Justices has occurred,” according to the Supreme Court’s website.

Three of the current nine members of the Supreme Court were appointed by President-elect Donald Trump during his first term in office, while only one of the current members was appointed by President Biden.

“Taking action to restore public trust in our nation’s most powerful Court is as urgent as it is necessary. Setting term limits for Supreme Court Justices will cut down on political gamesmanship, and is commonsense reform supported by a majority of Americans,” Welch noted, according to the press release. “I’m proud to lead this effort with Senator Manchin that will restore Americans’ faith in our judicial system.”

Sen. Joe Manchin,
Sen. Joe Manchin, I-W.Va., is joined by staff just before delivering his final address as he prepares to retire from the Senate, at the Capitol in Washington. AP
Justices of the US Supreme Court pose
the term limits would only impact justices appointed after ratification — all current justices would still be able to remain on the bench as long as they wish. AFP via Getty Images
Sen. Joe Manchin,
Manchin, a Democrat-turned-independent who has served in the Senate since late 2010, did not seek re-election this year. AP

A tale of two cities: Sanctuary city Dems must choose between Americans or illegal immigrants

By
-
0

The stark realities of illegal immigration have become impossible to ignore in America’s largest cities, where progressive leadership has long championed sanctuary policies, but the time of reckoning is here. New York City Mayor Eric Adams recently made waves with his candid remarks about the burden illegal immigrant criminals have placed on his city.  

His stated willingness to work with incoming border czar Tom Homan signals a growing acknowledgment among Democrats that their current approach is politically toxic after the 2024 election showed record numbers of Hispanic and Asian Americans in urban centers voting Republican and rejecting open borders. Meanwhile, in Chicago, residents have expressed outrage over their progressive mayor’s decision to protect illegal immigrant criminals. 

The contrasting statements of these two Democratic mayors reflect a broader, defining moment for the Democratic Party: Will they work to remove criminal illegal immigrants or continue defending policies that shelter them at the expense of taxpayers and innocent victims? 

The frustration in New York City and Chicago stems from the same root: poorly enforced immigration laws coupled with soft-on-crime local policies. Sanctuary city laws, which limit local cooperation with federal immigration authorities, were promoted under the pretense of protecting vulnerable immigrants who came to America just to work and go on with their lives. However, they have devolved into shields for criminals who exploit these policies at the expense of law-abiding citizens, legal immigrants and other unauthorized immigrants. 

Migrants wait to be processed

In cities across America, illegal immigrant gangs have taken over apartment complexes, formed shoplifting rings and even robbed and masturbated in front of an assistant district attorney inside her own home. No-bail laws mean that criminals are released nearly every single time after they are arrested – only to commit more crimes. Further, sanctuary city policies mean that even after conviction or arrest, these criminals aren’t held long enough for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to remove them from the country.  

Perhaps the 2024 election results in New York, which moved further right than any other state in the last four years, pushed Adams to change his tone on immigration. His openness to collaborating with Homan could mark a shift in the Democratic Party’s stance. If pursued in earnest, this cooperation could help restore law and order by prioritizing the removal of illegal immigrants who have committed crimes.  

But Adams faces opposition from the socialist-leaning city council, so he will have to act alone. He can align with the majority of Americans, who overwhelmingly support deporting criminals who are here illegally, or he can cave to the progressive wing of his party, which continues to defend policies that keep criminals on American streets. 

The Democratic Party’s dilemma presents a historic opportunity for Republicans, and for President-elect Donald Trump in particular. His promise to secure the border and prioritize the removal of criminal illegal immigrants is widely supported by the public. And, according to a recent Gallup poll, nearly two-thirds of Americans believe immigration is a good thing for the country.  

A Manhattan Institute poll suggests that Americans are also most interested in welcoming more legal immigrants who won’t depend on government assistance and will assimilate. Mass deportations of all illegal immigrants may be divisive, but most Democrat voters also support deporting criminals. This suggests that Americans are ready for a balanced approach – one that welcomes legal immigrants while forcefully deporting criminals. 

How exactly could Trump do this, especially in sanctuary jurisdictions? In a bold and strategic move, Trump should deploy ICE agents to sanctuary city police stations where criminal illegal immigrants are often processed and released. Sanctuary policies only prohibit law enforcement from holding illegal immigrants for additional time and going the extra mile to help ICE catch them. But local law enforcement cannot inhibit ICE from catching criminals if they happen to be right in front of them (and imagine the P.R. opportunity for Trump!). 

Trump has the chance to unite Americans on immigration by acting forcefully against criminal illegal immigrants and gain more popularity to enact the rest of his agenda. And Democratic mayors and governors must choose: will they stand in the way, or will they protect their own citizens before they vote them out? 

 

Biden’s three biggest lies about his family’s shady business dealings

By
-
0

President Joe Biden lied from start to finish about his family’s influence-peddling racket. He recently issued a sweeping pardon to his son, Hunter Biden, contradicting his repeated assurances that he would not interfere. This pardon may be one of the most comprehensive in U.S. history, encompassing over a decade of corruption. While some have drawn parallels between this pardon and President Gerald Ford’s pardon of former President Richard Nixon, the comparison falls short. Ford aimed to heal a divided nation; Biden is shielding himself and his family from accountability. 

Unlike the corporate media and Democrats, who sought to shield Biden until his political future was doomed, observers of the Biden crime family’s corrupt practices are unsurprised by this latest contradiction. Biden’s claim that he would not pardon Hunter Biden is part of a broader pattern of deception regarding his family’s business dealings in order to conceal his involvement. 

At the start of this Congress, the House Oversight and Accountability Committee launched an investigation into Joe Biden’s involvement in his family’s business dealings. Despite stonewalling from the Biden administration, we followed the Bidens’ money trail, exposing the 20 shell companies they set up to hide the shady foreign payments they received, all with Joe Biden at the center of the family business. 

Our investigation has exposed how Joe Biden lied repeatedly about his involvement in these schemes that enriched the Bidens to the tune of tens of millions of dollars. Here are some of the biggest lies that we exposed during our investigation. 

US-VOTE-POLITICS-DEMOCRATIC-CONVENTION

1. Hunter Biden laptop as Russian disinformation 

In October 2020, days before the presidential election, the Biden campaign and now Secretary of State Antony Blinken, orchestrated a misinformation campaign to discredit the contents of Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop, including evidence of Joe Biden’s involvement in his influence-peddling schemes. 

These disgraced 51 former intelligence officials claimed the laptop contained all the hallmarks of Russian disinformation, and Joe Biden parroted their claim during the 2020 presidential debate. Twitter removed the New York Post’s article about the laptop, even though former Twitter executives admitted before our committee that it did not violate the platform’s policies. 

We now know from the testimony of IRS whistleblower, Gary Shapley, that the FBI verified the authenticity of Hunter Biden’s laptop in November 2019. Special Counsel David Weiss, who led the federal criminal investigation into Hunter Biden, also used the laptop as evidence in court. 

2. ‘I have never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings’

Biden repeatedly claimed he never discussed his son’s business dealings. However, evidence uncovered during our investigation contradicts this assertion. Evidence obtained by our committee reveals then-Vice President Biden spoke, dined or had coffee with nearly all of Hunter Biden’s foreign business associates. 

Devon Archer, a Biden family associate, confirmed during a transcribed interview that when Joe Biden was Vice President, Joe Biden variously dined with Russian oligarch Yelena Baturina, Kazakhstani oligarch Kenes Rakishev, and Burisma’s corporate secretary Vadym Pozharsky at Café Milano in Washington, D.C. 

These dinners occurred as the foreign nationals or their affiliated entities were collectively paying Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, millions of dollars. Then-Vice President Joe Biden also met with Jonathan Li, a Chinese national who was Hunter Biden’s associate, and wrote a college letter of recommendation for his daughter. Even when presented with this evidence, President Biden continued to lie to the American people. 

Rob Walker, a Biden family associate who was involved in the Biden’s dealings with Chinese and Romanian entities, confirmed during a transcribed interview that Joe Biden met with the now-missing Chairman of CEFC Ye Jianming as Hunter Biden and his associates received $3 million from a Chinese entity CEFC controlled. 

Jason Galanis, another Biden family business associate, testified that Hunter Biden put his father on speakerphone with Yelena Baturina. Joe Biden ended the call by stating, “Ok then, you be good to my boy.” A few days later, Baturina committed to a “hard order” of $10-20 million to an entity benefitting Hunter Biden. 

Biden repeatedly claimed he never discussed his son’s business dealings. However, evidence uncovered during our investigation contradicts this assertion. Evidence obtained by our committee reveals then-Vice President Biden spoke, dined or had coffee with nearly all of Hunter Biden’s foreign business associates. 

3. “My son has not made money … in China” 

During the 2020 presidential election, President Biden told the American people that his son did not make money in China. However, our investigation has uncovered that Hunter Biden and other Biden family members received millions from China for unknown services.  

Additionally, we traced how $40,000 in Chinese money landed in Joe Biden’s personal bank account. When confronted with the fact that his family did indeed receive money from China, President Biden lied again and said it was not true that his family received money from China. 

As the truth came out during our investigation, the Biden camp tried to move the goalposts from Joe “never spoke” with his son about his business dealings to “the president was never in business with his son.” All these lies have been committed to hide the fact that Joe Biden was the family business. At a hearing, where former Biden family associates were under oath, they confirmed Joe Biden’s involvement in his family’s business and that he was “the brand.”   

IRS whistleblowers, Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, confirmed under oath that the Department of Justice prohibited them from following evidence that would have led to Joe Biden. Joe Biden has long prided himself on his integrity, yet his legacy will be defined by his repeated falsehoods. Joe Biden has lied for a living. 

 

Biden spent millions on ‘misinformation’ research. The details are even more disturbing than you think

By
-
0

A new report by Open the Books, a nonpartisan government watchdog, has revealed that since 2021, the Biden administration has spent hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on research related to “misinformation,” a significant rise compared to the first Trump administration. 

The increase in spending raises serious concerns about civil liberties and free speech online, especially on social media platforms, where much of the Biden administrations’ efforts were directed. 

Since 2021, the Biden-Harris White House has spent at least $267 million on research grants and contracts related to “misinformation” or “disinformation.” 

During President-elect Donald Trump’s first term, the same federal agencies provided just $6.72 million on similar programs. That means the Biden administration increased federal spending on contracts and grants for misinformation by more than 3,800%. 

white house night

Disturbing details 

On its own, the fact that the Biden-Harris administration has spent $267 million on misinformation grants and contracts is extremely disconcerting. The federal government shouldn’t be involved, directly or indirectly, in the fact-checking industry. Nor should it engage in efforts designed to limit the speech of citizens, particularly when taxpayers are the ones footing the bill. 

But the cost and creation of these misinformation programs is just the tip of the iceberg. Open the Books conducted a detailed review of many of the programs, contracts and grants as part of its report, and I subsequently verified and expanded upon some of their findings. 

What we found is clear evidence that the Biden-Harris White House used funds to support or develop Orwellian surveillance and propaganda strategies, create methods and tools to restrict speech online, and even to finance highly politicized reports critical of Trump. 

For example, Open the Books reports that in 2022 the Department of Health and Human Services provided $2.3 million to the University of Pennsylvania for “investigating and identifying the heterogeneity in COVID-19 misinformation exposure on social media among black and rural communities to inform precision public health messaging” because “misinformation contributes to confusion, distrust, and distress around health behaviors such as vaccination, mask wearing, and social distancing.” 

The research description suggests that the project requires collecting and analyzing large amounts of social media posts online, all in the name of stopping public health misinformation — a term that has been used to justify silencing the speech of Americans questioning the views of government, academia and other powerful institutions. 

The Biden administration funded similar COVID-19 misinformation projects at other universities as well, including the University of Texas and Michigan State University. 

Of course, it’s true that health-related misinformation can be harmful to the public, but the Biden administration and many of America’s elite universities are clearly not qualified to speak authoritatively on the matter, nor worthy of receiving significant taxpayer funding. After all, throughout the height of the coronavirus pandemic, they repeatedly spread false information about public health issues. 

For example, despite overwhelming evidence that mask mandates do not prevent the spread of COVID-19, the Biden administration forced Americans to wear masks while using public transportation systems, such as airlines. It also required masks for many federal workers and for citizens entering government buildings. This continued until 2022 — two years after the pandemic began and long after government health data had shown mask mandates do not work. 

Department of Homeland Security

The University of Pennsylvania didn’t perform much better. It imposed Draconian mask-mandate policies of its own and its School of Medicine published poorly designed research claiming designed research claiming mask mandates were effective.  

Much more comprehensive studies conducted over longer periods later proved reports like those published by the University of Pennsylvania were wrong, a conclusion supported by countless public health officials and even some pundits at left-wing publications, including New York Times columnist Bret Stephens. 

Incredibly, the grant to the University of Pennsylvania is still active and isn’t slated to end until 2027, which means taxpayers will likely continue to fund the research for years to come. 

Propaganda machine 

Open the Books also discovered that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) hired a defense contractor, Guidehouse, to conduct “misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation analysis.” In September 2023, DHS started a $1.2 million contract with Guidehouse.   

Public and private sector clients use Guidehouse to help them combat alleged misinformation online. In one report published by Guidehouse about the “growing threat of misinformation,” the group noted that it helps its clients, including governments, using a “six-step approach to misinformation and disinformation detection.” Among the six steps is a plan to “Configure and deploy the tools and technologies that will be used to monitor the information landscape,” as well as the creation of “counter-messages to inaccurate or false information.” 

It’s not hard to imagine how such programs and strategies could be abused by federal officials, who have repeatedly been caught pressuring social media companies to restrict the speech of their users and limit the spread of news stories that damage left-wing politicians and their family members, such as Hunter Biden. 

The Biden administration even went so far as to fund partisan reports about its chief political opponent, Donald Trump. In Fiscal Year 2022, the National Science Foundation paid nearly $200,000 to George Washington University researchers to develop a study titled “Pandemic Communication in Time of Populism: Building Resilient Media and Ensuring Effective Pandemic Communication in Divided Societies.” 

As Open the Books explains, “Researchers on this Biden-era grant examined how so-called ‘populist’ leaders supposedly prevented society from coming together in ‘solidarity’ during the COVID pandemic. Trump’s presidency was a focus of the research, along with the leaders of three other countries.” 

What we found is clear evidence that the Biden-Harris White House used funds to support or develop Orwellian surveillance and propaganda strategies, create methods and tools to restrict speech online, and even to finance highly politicized reports critical of Trump. 

Unsurprisingly, the NSF-funded report included a recommendation to give academics, government officials, and other “experts” more authority in how future public health crises are handled. 

Brighter future? 

The truth is, a government that respects free speech rights does not spend hundreds of millions of dollars trying to figure out ways to limit, combat or research the speech of its citizens. 

President-elect Trump has promised that his administration will defend free speech. If that truly is his intention, and I have no reason to believe it isn’t, then a good place to start is eliminating the Biden administration’s disturbing, vast misinformation and disinformation programs. 

 

Ivermectin’s Potential Against Cancer: A Comprehensive Overview

By
Rocci Stucci
-
0

In recent years, the quest for effective treatments for cancer has prompted researchers to delve into existing medications that may hold previously unrecognized therapeutic potential. Among these medications is Ivermectin, a drug that has traditionally been utilized for the treatment of various parasitic infections.

A particularly noteworthy study conducted by a research group based in Mexico has investigated the antitumor effects of Ivermectin across a diverse range of 28 different types of cancer. This significant research, published in 2020 by Juarez et al., provides compelling evidence that supports the clinical development of Ivermectin as a repositioned drug for cancer treatment. The findings of this study, while currently accessible only behind a paywall, are essential for enhancing our understanding of the broader implications of Ivermectin within the field of oncology. By exploring the potential of this established medication, researchers aim to uncover new avenues for cancer therapy that could ultimately lead to improved outcomes for patients facing this challenging disease. The implications of such research could be transformative, as they may pave the way for innovative treatment strategies that leverage existing drugs in novel ways.

Study Overview

The researchers undertook a comprehensive series of experiments designed to rigorously evaluate the efficacy of Ivermectin when administered at a dosage of 2 mg/kg/day. This specific dosage corresponds to an approximate in vitro concentration of 5 µM, which is significant for its potential clinical applications. The choice of this dosage is particularly noteworthy as it is considered clinically feasible, thereby opening up the intriguing possibility of repurposing Ivermectin for the treatment of various types of cancer. The primary objective of the study was to systematically identify which specific types of cancer exhibit the highest sensitivity to the effects of the drug, as well as to determine which types are the least responsive. This information is crucial as it lays a solid foundation for the design and implementation of future clinical trials and treatment protocols, ultimately aiming to enhance therapeutic strategies in oncology.

Most Sensitive Cancer Types

The study revealed that several cancer cell lines exhibited high sensitivity to Ivermectin, including:

  1. Ovarian Cancer: Known for its aggressive nature and late-stage diagnosis, ovarian cancer can benefit from Ivermectin’s ability to inhibit cell proliferation.
  2. Breast Cancer: Particularly effective against Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC), which lacks targeted therapies, Ivermectin may offer a novel treatment avenue for this challenging subtype.
  3. Glioblastoma: This highly aggressive brain tumor is notoriously difficult to treat; Ivermectin’s efficacy could provide new hope for patients.
  4. Lung Cancer: Ivermectin’s potential to inhibit lung cancer cell growth may aid in developing combination therapies.
  5. Colon Cancer: With high incidence rates, colon cancer could see improved treatment outcomes through Ivermectin’s antitumor effects.
  6. Uterine Squamous Cell Carcinoma (SCC): This type of cancer is often resistant to conventional therapies, making Ivermectin an attractive option.
  7. Hepatocellular Carcinoma: As the most common type of liver cancer, the application of Ivermectin could lead to significant advancements in treatment.
  8. Breast TNBC: Given its resistance to many treatments, Ivermectin’s role in targeting this cancer type is particularly promising.
  9. Pancreatic Cancer: Known for its poor prognosis, pancreatic cancer may benefit from Ivermectin’s ability to inhibit tumor growth.
  10. Endometrial Cancer: The potential for Ivermectin to provide therapeutic benefits in this cancer type is noteworthy, especially given its increasing prevalence.

These findings underscore the potential of Ivermectin as a promising therapeutic option for aggressive cancer types, potentially improving treatment outcomes and offering new hope to patients.

Least Sensitive Cancer Types

Conversely, the research identified certain cancers that demonstrated low sensitivity to Ivermectin, including:

  1. Osteosarcoma: This bone cancer’s resistance to Ivermectin presents challenges for treatment, necessitating further investigation.
  2. Gastric Cancer: The complex biology of gastric cancer may limit Ivermectin’s efficacy, highlighting the need for combination therapies.
  3. Melanoma: Known for its aggressive nature and ability to metastasize, melanoma’s response to Ivermectin was less favorable, indicating that alternative treatment strategies may be required.

Despite these findings, it is essential to note that Ivermectin still exhibited effects on cancer stem cells in these less sensitive cancers, suggesting potential avenues for further research.

Impact on Lymphoma and Leukemia

Mechanism of Action

Understanding how Ivermectin exerts its antitumor effects is critical for its potential repurposing. The study suggests several mechanisms through which Ivermectin may influence cancer cell behavior:

  • Cell Cycle Arrest
  • Inhibition of Cancer Stem-Like Cells
  • Synergistic Effects with Chemotherapy
  • Tumor Growth Inhibition

Understanding the mechanisms by which Ivermectin exerts its antitumor effects is essential for exploring its potential repurposing in cancer treatment. The study presents several intriguing mechanisms through which Ivermectin may influence the behavior of cancer cells, highlighting its multifaceted role in combating tumors.

One of the primary mechanisms identified is cell cycle arrest. Research has shown that Ivermectin can effectively inhibit the proliferation of cancer cells by inducing a state of cell cycle arrest. This process effectively halts the division and growth of cancer cells, which may ultimately lead to a reduction in tumor size and progression. By preventing cancer cells from advancing through the cell cycle, Ivermectin creates an environment that is less conducive to tumor growth.

Another significant aspect of Ivermectin’s action is its inhibition of cancer stem-like cells. These cells are particularly noteworthy because they often exhibit resistance to conventional therapies and play a crucial role in tumor recurrence. Ivermectin’s ability to preferentially target and reduce the population of these cancer stem cells is particularly important, as it may help to prevent relapse and improve long-term outcomes for patients. By diminishing the reservoir of these resilient cells, Ivermectin could contribute to more effective cancer management strategies.

Additionally, the study suggests that Ivermectin may have synergistic effects when used in conjunction with various chemotherapy drugs. This potential for synergy is particularly promising, as it could enhance the overall effectiveness of chemotherapy treatments. By combining Ivermectin with established chemotherapy agents, there is a possibility of achieving better patient outcomes while also minimizing the side effects commonly associated with these treatments. This combination approach could represent a significant advancement in cancer therapy, offering a more comprehensive strategy for managing the disease.

Furthermore, Ivermectin has demonstrated the ability to inhibit tumor growth in preclinical models, especially in studies involving breast cancer mouse models. These findings provide strong support for the notion of advancing Ivermectin into clinical trials for cancer treatment. The evidence gathered thus far underscores the potential of Ivermectin as a valuable addition to the arsenal of cancer therapies, warranting further investigation into its efficacy and safety in human patients. Overall, the multifaceted mechanisms through which Ivermectin operates highlight its promise as a repurposed agent in the fight against cancer.

Implications for Turbo Cancers

The study also initiates significant discussions regarding the phenomenon known as Turbo Cancers. This term refers to a specific category of aggressive cancers that have reportedly emerged in the wake of COVID-19 vaccinations utilizing mRNA technology. These Turbo Cancers are notably characterized by their rapid progression, which poses a serious challenge to patients and healthcare providers alike. Additionally, they exhibit a concerning resistance to conventional chemotherapy treatments, making them particularly difficult to manage. In this context, the potential of Ivermectin to overcome this resistance to chemotherapy is especially noteworthy. This suggests that Ivermectin could play a crucial and potentially transformative role in the treatment of patients who are grappling with these formidable challenges posed by Turbo Cancers. The implications of this finding could be significant for future therapeutic strategies and patient outcomes.

Conclusion

This groundbreaking study conducted by Juarez et al. marks a significant milestone as it represents the very first comprehensive evaluation of the effects of Ivermectin across an impressive array of 28 different cancer types. The findings of this research highlight the potential of Ivermectin as an effective treatment option for cancer, which could have far-reaching implications for the field of oncology. The significance of these findings cannot be overstated, as they suggest that Ivermectin could emerge as a vital tool in the ongoing fight against cancer, offering new hope to patients and healthcare providers alike.

However, it is important to note that the limited access to the full study raises serious concerns regarding the transparency of research in this critical area. As investigations into repositioned drugs, such as Ivermectin, continue to unfold, it becomes increasingly essential for the scientific community and the public to remain informed about their potential benefits and risks. Advocating for more accessible research outcomes is crucial to ensure that valuable information reaches those who need it most.

The future of cancer treatment may very well hinge on our ability to repurpose existing medications effectively, and Ivermectin stands out prominently as a promising candidate in this ongoing quest for innovative and effective therapies. As we continue to explore the possibilities of using established drugs in new ways, the insights gained from studies like this one will play a pivotal role in shaping the landscape of cancer treatment and improving patient outcomes.

Hunter Biden: A look at how the saga spanning over six years unfolded

By
-
0

President Biden pardoned his son, Hunter Biden, ending a saga that has lasted for more than six years, with wide-ranging investigations by the Justice Department and both chambers of Congress related to his conduct and business dealings. 

Hunter Biden was found guilty of three felony firearm offenses stemming from Special Counsel David Weiss’ investigation. The first son was also charged with federal tax crimes regarding the failure to pay at least $1.4 million in taxes. Before his trial, Hunter Biden entered a surprise guilty plea. 

The charges carried up to 17 years behind bars. His sentencing was scheduled for Dec. 16. 

Here’s a look back at how it all began: 

The Bidens in July 2024

The federal investigation into Hunter Biden began in 2018.

The probe was predicated, in part, by suspicious activity reports (SARs) regarding foreign transactions. Those SARs, according to sources familiar with the investigation, involved funds from “China and other foreign nations.”

Fox News first reported the existence of some type of federal investigation involving Hunter Biden in October 2020, ahead of the last presidential election. It became known then that in the course of an existing money laundering investigation, the FBI had subpoenaed the laptop purportedly belonging to Hunter Biden.

Stories about the laptop were widely panned by Democrats and mainstream media outlets as Russian disinformation. At the time, then-Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe confirmed that the laptop was “not part of some Russian disinformation campaign,” but that claim was rejected by Democrats and many in the media.

Social media companies like Twitter and Facebook censored and limited the circulation of stories related to Hunter Biden’s laptop before the 2020 presidential election.

Only in 2022 did media outlets verify that the laptop did belong to Hunter Biden and did hold legitimate records belonging to him.

Twitter, under the new ownership of Elon Musk, released records surrounding the company’s decisions to block the circulation of the Hunter Biden stories – even though he had been under federal investigation at that point for nearly two years.

Hunter Biden confirmed the investigation into his “tax affairs” in December 2020, after his father was elected president.

But Hunter Biden’s business dealings were also, simultaneously, being investigated by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., in 2019. Specifically, the senators were investigating Hunter Biden’s business dealings with Ukrainian natural gas firm Burisma Holdings. 

Grassley in hallway of Senate

Grassley and Johnson released a report in September 2020 saying that Obama administration officials “knew” that Hunter Biden’s position on the board of Burisma was “problematic” and that it interfered “in the efficient execution of policy with respect to Ukraine.”

Hunter Biden joined Burisma in April 2014 and, at the time, reportedly connected the firm with consulting firm Blue Star Strategies to help the natural gas company fight corruption charges in Ukraine. During the time Hunter Biden was on the board of the company, Joe Biden was vice president and was running U.S.-Ukraine relations and policy for the Obama administration.

Ron Johnson

Also in 2019, Hunter Biden’s business dealings in Ukraine came into the spotlight during the first impeachment of now-President-elect Donald Trump. 

House Republicans wanted to call Hunter Biden to testify in the impeachment proceedings in the fall of 2019. 

Trump was acquitted in Feb. 2020 on both articles of impeachment against him — abuse of power and obstruction of Congress — after being impeached by the House of Representatives in December 2019. 

Trump was impeached after a July 2019 phone call in which he pressed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to launch investigations into the Biden family’s actions and business dealings in Ukraine, specifically Hunter Biden’s ventures with Burisma and Joe Biden’s successful effort to have former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin ousted.

At the same time as that call, Hunter Biden was under federal investigation, prompted by his suspicious foreign transactions. 

Joe Biden, Hunter Biden and Donald Trump

Trump’s request was regarded by Democrats as a quid pro quo because millions in U.S. military aid to Ukraine had been frozen. Democrats also said Trump was meddling in the 2020 presidential election by asking a foreign leader to look into a Democrat political opponent.

Republicans had been investigating Hunter Biden’s business dealings, specifically with regard Burisma. House Republicans, who were in the minority at the time, made several requests to subpoena Hunter Biden for testimony and documents related to the impeachment of Trump and his business dealings that fell at the center of the proceedings.

Biden has acknowledged that when he was vice president, he successfully pressured Ukraine to fire Shokin. At the time, Shokin was investigating Burisma and Hunter Biden had a highly lucrative role on the board, receiving thousands of dollars per month. The then-vice president threatened to withhold $1 billion of critical U.S. aid if Shokin were not fired.

“I said, ‘You’re not getting the billion.’ … I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money,’” Biden recalled telling then-Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko. Biden recollected the conversation during an event for the Council on Foreign Relations in 2018.

Meanwhile, once President Biden took office, the House Oversight Committee led by Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., began investigating Hunter Biden’s business dealings and the business dealings of the Biden family. Comer ultimately found that the Biden family and its associates had received more than $27 million from foreign individuals or entities since 2014.

James Comer

But it wasn’t until 2023 that whistleblowers from the IRS, Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, brought allegations of politicization in the federal probe of Hunter Biden to Congress. 

The two alleged that political influence had infected prosecutorial decisions in the federal probe, which was led by Trump-appointed Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss, who they said had requested to become a special counsel. 

After Shapley and Ziegler testified publicly, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Weiss as special counsel to continue his investigation of the first son and, ultimately, bring federal charges against him in two separate jurisdictions — Delaware and California. 

Photo of David Weiss

House Republicans continued to investigate allegations of politicization brought by Ziegler and Shapley, as well as findings related to the Biden family’s business dealings from Comer’s probe. 

Comer, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan and Ways & Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith came together and launched an impeachment inquiry against President Biden to determine whether he had any involvement in his son’s business dealings. Biden repeatedly denied having any involvement, despite evidence placing him at meetings and on phone calls with his son and his foreign business partners.

Rep. Jim Jordan

In August, House lawmakers released their final report, spanning 292 pages, saying that Biden had engaged in “impeachable conduct.” They said he had “abused his office” and “defrauded the United States to enrich his family.”  

Republicans said there is “overwhelming evidence” that Biden had participated in a “conspiracy to monetize his office of public trust to enrich his family.” They alleged that the Biden family and their business associates had received tens of millions of dollars from foreign interests by “leading those interests to believe that such payments would provide them access to and influence with President Biden.” 

Reporters talk to Hunter Biden.

In the summer of 2023, Hunter Biden pleaded guilty to federal gun charges as part of a plea deal that collapsed before a federal judge in Delaware. In a stunning reversal, Hunter Biden was forced to plead not guilty and sat for a trial this year. 

Before his trial for federal tax crimes, Hunter Biden pleaded guilty. 

President Biden’s pardon of his son came after months of vowing to the American people that he would not do so. 

But on Sunday, the president announced a blanket pardon that applies to any offenses against the U.S. that Hunter Biden “has committed or may have committed” from Jan. 1, 2014, to Dec. 1, 2024. 

“From the day I took office, I said I would not interfere with the Justice Department’s decision-making, and I kept my word even as I have watched my son being selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted,” Biden said. “There has been an effort to break Hunter — who has been five and a half years sober, even in the face of unrelenting attacks and selective prosecution. In trying to break Hunter, they’ve tried to break me — and there’s no reason to believe it will stop here. Enough is enough.”

Biden added, “I hope Americans will understand why a father and a president would come to this decision.” 

 

Trump features Jill Biden in new ad for fragrance: ‘Enemies can’t resist’

By
-
0

President-elect Donald Trump has released a new fragrance line for men and women to commemorate his historic election victory, and he found an unwitting model to help sell it.

An online ad for the fragrance features a viral photo of Trump and Jill Biden, with the first lady seemingly smiling at him at the reopening ceremony of the Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris on Saturday.

“Here are my new Trump Perfumes & Colognes! I call them Fight, Fight, Fight, because they represent us WINNING,” Trump wrote in a post on his social media platform, Truth Social.

“A fragrance your enemies can’t resist,” reads the tagline.

Trump fragrance ad

Trump sat between French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife, Brigitte Macron, during the ceremony, which was also attended by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Britain’s Prince William.

The first lady and her daughter, Ashley, were also seated in the same row as Trump.

Noticeably missing from the festivities was President Biden, who declined an invitation to attend the ceremony held five years after a devastating fire wrecked the centuries-old Paris landmark. The White House cited a “scheduling conflict.”

On Election Day last month, social media erupted when the first lady was photographed wearing a red pantsuit to cast her ballot. The wardrobe selection raised eyebrows, as the color red is synonymous with the Republican Party.

Many took to X to joke that the first lady voted for Trump in the wake of speculation the Bidens were not thrilled with the way the president was forced to end his re-election bid in July.

The first lady caused another social media firestorm when many noted what seemed to be an icy reception for Vice President Harris at Arlington National Cemetery’s Tomb of the Unknown Soldier during a remembrance ceremony on Veterans Day. Harris was Trump’s opponent in the 2024 presidential race.

As Harris took her seat for the wreath-laying ceremony, Biden appeared to look straight ahead through dark sunglasses.

“Jill Biden refused to even look at Kamala,” wrote the popular X account “End Wokeness.”

Conservative author David Harris Jr. has suggested there seems to be a “rift” within the party after Harris’ blowout loss to Trump.

On his fragrance website, the “Fight, Fight, Fight” collection is for “Patriots who never back down, like President Trump.”

First lady Jill Biden speaks with President-elect Donald Trump during a ceremony to mark the reopening of Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris on Dec. 7, 2024.

“This scent is your rallying cry in a bottle,” the description reads. “This limited edition cologne embodies strength, power, and victory.”

The perfume and cologne bottles feature Trump’s image and raised fist from the July 13 assassination attempt on him at the Butler, Pennsylvania, rally that claimed the life of Corey Comperatore, 50, a firefighter and father of two daughters.

Trump was hit in the right ear, and two other men, David Dutch and James Copenhaver, were also wounded by gunfire.

Kamala Harris and Jill Biden

The perfume and cologne start at $199 and $298 for a buy one, get one for 50% option.

Two of the fragrances are already sold out, according to the website.

“Great Christmas gifts for the family. Go to gettrumpfragrances.com/. Merry Christmas, and Happy New Year!” Trump wrote.

This is the latest product the president-elect has sold this year. He also sold “God Bless the USA” Bibles and a line of $400 sneakers during his presidential campaign.

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House and the first lady for comment but did not immediately receive a response.

Fox News Digital’s Charles Creitz contributed to this report.

 

Trump, Prince William sit down for meeting in Paris after Notre Dame ceremony

By
-
0

President-elect Trump and Prince William shook hands at the re-opening ceremony of Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris on Saturday, and afterward held a sit-down meeting at the British Embassy ahead of Trump’s inauguration. 

Trump and William also separately met with world leaders at Notre Dame, including French President Emmanuel Macron and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. 

William was seen shaking hands and speaking with first lady Jill Biden, who represented the United States at the ceremony in place of President Biden. 

Prince William was asked to represent Britain at the event and after the ceremony, he and Trump reconvened at the British Embassy in Paris to discuss the “special relationship” between the U.K. and the U.S. 

Trump shaking hands with Prince William

Fox News Digital has reached out to Kensington Palace and the Trump transition team for comment. 

The meeting was the pair’s first since Trump won the election. They last met during his first term in 2019 when Trump made a state visit to the U.K. 

William also met with President Biden in 2022, while he was there for his Earthshot Prize. 

Trump and William at the UK ambassadors residence

Trump also met with then-Prince Charles in 2019 and Clarence House said at the time that the two have a “good working relationship.”

Trump and William with reporters

Trump told ITV in 2019 that he was supposed to meet with Charles for 15 minutes during his state visit, but they ended up talking for over an hour about the environment. 

Trump and Prince William speaking at British embassy

“He is really into climate change, and I think that’s great. I mean, I want that. I like that,” Trump told ITV in 2019. “What he really wants, and what he really feels warmly about, is the future. He wants to make sure future generations have climate that is good climate, as opposed to a disaster. And I agree.”

William shaking hands with Jill Biden

King Charles also contacted Trump last summer via a letter after his assassination attempt. 

President Trump and first lady Melania Trump with Queen Elizabeth in 2019. 

The president-elect also met with the late Queen Elizabeth during the 2019 visit. 

Trump speaking with Prince Charles

Notre Dame has been under renovation since a devastating fire damaged the nearly 900-year-old cathedral, probably the most famous in Paris, in 2019. 

 

Social media reacts to Trump ‘dominating world leaders’ with Macron handshake during meeting in France

By
-
0

Social media users erupted over President-elect Trump’s “dominating” handshake with French President Emmanuel Macron at their meeting in Paris Saturday.

Trump traveled to France to attend the reopening of the Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris, his first international trip since winning the 2024 presidential election. Ahead of the event, Trump met Macron, and the two shook hands in a gesture that quickly went viral online.

“President Trump is back to dominating world leaders with his handshake,” one user, George, wrote in a post on X. “Macron is going to need a hand massage after all that twisting and pulling Trump did to him.”

Macron and Trump

“President Trump manhandles French President Emmanuel Macron with one of the most dominating handshakes I’ve ever seen,” said commentator Drew Hernandez. “We are so back.”

Colin Rugg wrote, “7 years later and the handshake battle continues between Donald Trump and Emmanuel Macron.”

During a meeting in 2017, during Trump’s first term in office, the two world leaders had a 29-second handshake and appeared to be tugging back and forth as they walked with their wives.

Presidents Macron and Trump

“The Trump-Macron handshake is hilarious,” author John Lefevre said in a post on X. “Because it happened twice. And you know Macron was told to prepare and probably practiced and then still got dominated.”

Trump’s handshakes with world leaders have gone viral over the years, including when he pulled in Russian President Putin’s arm during a handshake at the G-20 Summit in 2019.

Trump attended the reopening ceremony alongside political figures, including first lady Jill Biden and Prince William.

 

JONATHAN TURLEY: ANTIFA gear for kids? Democrats think it’s cute to flaunt support for violent group

By
-
0

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Editor’s note: This column was first published on the author’s blog: Res ipsa loquitur – The thing itself speaks.

It appears no liberal Christmas is complete without the ultimate stocking stuffer: an actual stocking to wear over your face while rioting. While not yet selling face coverings for anonymous violence, Crooked Media, co-founded by former Obama staffers Jon Favreau, Jon Lovett, and Tommy Vietor, is reportedly selling a line of Antifa items for liberals wanting to make a statement against any “Peace on Earth.” 

You can now proudly wear your “Antifa Dad” hat to signal your support for political violence and deplatforming. It is the ultimate naughty gift list for putting the slay back into your Sleigh Bells.

These liberal hosts and their “Pod Save America” podcast have been featured on various shows and courted by figures like former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

There is no apparent backlash for their support of one of the most violent groups in the world, which routinely attacks journalists and anyone who holds opposing views. Imagine the media response if a conservative site started selling similar “Proud Boy” items.

Yet, Crooked Media is now offering liberals the chance to buy “ANTIFA” onesies for babies, a T-shirt for toddlers reading “ANTIFA” and other items.

Images of Crooked Medias products, a baby onesie and a

Just to make sure that everyone understands the support for the violent group, a spokesperson for Crooked Media told Fox News Digital that the clothes it has listed on its website “are not a joke.” The spokesman added that “all toddlers are antifa until their souls are broken by capitalism.”

As discussed in my new book, “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” I explore the history of Antifa as a movement that began in Germany:

“Antifa originated with European anarchist and Marxist groups from the 1920s, particularly Antifaschistische Aktion, a Communist group from the Weimar Republic before World War II. Its name resulted from the shortening of the German word antifaschistisch. In the United States, the modern movement emerged through the Anti- Racist Action (ARA) groups, which were dominated by anarchists and Marxists. It has an association with the anarchist organization Love and Rage, which was founded by former Trotsky and Marxist followers as well as offshoots like Mexico’s Amor Y Rabia. The oldest U.S. group is likely the Rose City Antifa (RCA) in Portland, Oregon, which would become the center of violent riots during the Trump years. The anarchist roots of the group give it the same organizational profile as such groups in the early twentieth century with uncertain leadership and undefined structures.”

Despite the denial of its existence by figures like Rep. Jerry Nadler, D., N.Y., I have long written and spoken about the threat of Antifa to free speech on our campuses and in our communities. This includes testimony before Congress on Antifa’s central role in the anti-free speech movement nationally.

Crooked Media's

As I have previously written, it has long been the “Keyser Söze” of the anti-free speech movement, a loosely aligned group that employs measures to avoid easy detection or association.  Yet, FBI Director Chris Wray has repeatedly pushed back on the denials of Antifa’s work or violence. In one hearing, Wray stated, “And we have quite a number” — and “Antifa is a real thing. It’s not a fiction.”

We have continued to follow the attacks and arrests of Antifa followers across the country, including attacks on journalists.

Some Democrats have played a dangerous game in supporting or excusing the work of Antifa. Former Democratic National Committee deputy chair Keith Ellison, now the Minnesota attorney general, once said Antifa would “strike fear in the heart” of Donald Trump. This was after Antifa had been involved in numerous acts of violence, and its website was banned in Germany.

Ellison’s son, Minneapolis City Council member Jeremiah Ellison, declared his allegiance to Antifa in the heat of the protests this summer. During a prior hearing, Democratic senators refused to clearly denounce Antifa and falsely suggested that the far right was the primary cause of recent violence. Likewise, President Joe Biden has dismissed objections to Antifa as just “an idea.”

'Pod Save America' live image

It is at its base a movement at war with free speech, defining the right itself as a tool of oppression. That purpose is evident in what is called the “bible” of the Antifa movement: Rutgers Professor Mark Bray’s “Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook.”

Bray emphasizes the struggle of the movement against free speech: “At the heart of the anti-fascist outlook is a rejection of the classical liberal phrase that says, ‘I disapprove of what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.’”

Bray admits that “most Americans in Antifa have been anarchists or antiauthoritarian communists…  From that standpoint, ‘free speech’ as such is merely a bourgeois fantasy unworthy of consideration.”

Now, liberal families can bring a small part of that political violence into their homes for the holidays to pledge that there will be no peace or silent nights so long as opposing views are heard. Antifa has gone retail, and there is no better way to celebrate political violence and rage than your Antifa onesie.

With tensions rising after the election, the embrace of organizations like Antifa will only fuel calls for violent action. Liberal figures like ex-Washington Post reporter Taylor Lorenz have even conveyed support for the assassination of  UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in Manhattan.

It is not the time to go full naughty list to celebrate a group that regularly beats reporters and others with opposing viewpoints. While this may appeal to your own special smash-mouth Santa, tis not the season for political violence.

 

Adding laughter to your life can boost health and healing, experts say

By
-
0

Wonder why you feel better after a good laugh? 

There’s reliable evidence that laughter improves various aspects of mental, emotional and physical health. 

If you’re experiencing stress, pain or challenges to your immune system, finding ways to incorporate laughter into your daily life could be an effective remedy. 

Health experts say humor and giggles can be good medicine — and that’s no joke.

Why laughter matters

Simple and actionable steps to add more smiles to your life can make a difference. 

laughing together

“When considering lifestyle changes to improve health, people often overlook the benefits of laughter,” Michael Richardson, M.D., a family physician with Carbon Health in Boston, told Fox News Digital. 

“Research shows that laughter can reduce stress, boost the immune system and even help alleviate pain.”  

As a primary care doctor, Richardson encourages patients to prioritize joy in their lives; he said laughter is an excellent way to do so. 

“Just as you may set aside time each week for exercise, it may be worth scheduling moments of laughter in your daily or weekly routine,” the doctor said. 

“Making this a regular habit could have a protective effect on overall health.”

How does laughter positively impact the body?

The body is receptive to laughter — here’s how it works. 

There are two parts of the nervous system — the sympathetic and the parasympathetic, said Beth Oller, M.D., a family physician with Rooks County Health Center in Stockton, Kansas. 

The sympathetic nervous system is responsible for fight-or-flight responses, “which are activated all too often in many of us, with all the things to worry about in our world today.”

Grandma laughing

Over-activation of the sympathetic nervous system can increase the risk of heart disease, cancer, obesity and other illnesses, Oller said.

“On the other hand, our parasympathetic nervous system is the one that calms our body down — and exercise, meditation, deep breathing and laughing can activate this system,” the doctor continued. 

“Laughing decreases the stress hormone cortisol, which helps reverse the stress response.”

“Laughter is free, lacks side effects, and has psychological and physical benefits.”

Some early research has found that laughter decreases stress hormones, reduces artery inflammation and increases HDL, which is the “good cholesterol,” said Oller. 

“Laughter has been associated with a lower prevalence of cardiovascular disease by increasing blood flow and oxygen intake,” the doctor added. “Laughter promotes vasodilation, which leads to improved blood flow and enhances circulation.” 

It has also been shown that laughter can help alleviate pain by releasing endorphins, stimulating circulation and relaxing the muscles, Oller added.

Laughing can even add years to your life, the expert noted: “It has been found that regular laughing is associated with reduced all-cause mortality.”

The role of laughter in mental health

The psychological benefits of laughter have been researched for some time, according to Sara Brides, a licensed clinical social worker who treats patients at Novant Health Cancer Institute in Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

“Laughter can reduce stress,” she told Fox News Digital. “Our brains can cope with stress; however, remaining in a stress response for prolonged periods of time is not healthy.”

“One way to increase spontaneous laughter is to intentionally spend time with those you enjoy and who naturally make you laugh.”

When someone laughs — particularly when it’s spontaneous or genuine laughter — endorphins are released, cortisol (the stress hormone) decreases, and dopamine and serotonin (the happy hormones) increase.

“Dopamine is associated with a sense of reward, pleasant sensations and motivation, and serotonin is associated with happiness, decreased depression and anxiety, and learning and motivation,” Brides added. 

Family laughing TV

Lightheartedness and joy can also be a bridge to better social outreach.

“One way to increase spontaneous laughter is to intentionally spend time with those you enjoy and who naturally make you laugh,” Brides said.

Long-term benefits

A quick dose of humor is a good start, but consistent laughter could have the following long-term benefits, according to Mayo Clinic.

Immune system boost

Negative thoughts may manifest into chemical reactions that can affect the body by bringing on more stress, according to the Mayo Clinic, which means laughter could be a remedy for better health.

Improved outlook

Laughter can also make it easier to cope with difficult situations and to reach common ground with others, stated the same source. 

Lighter mood

Laughter can help lessen stress, depression and anxiety, and may make you feel happier by boosting your self-esteem, per Mayo Clinic. 

Finding ways to add humor

Like many things in life, humor is a skill, said physician Oller in Kansas — and to develop a skill, practice is key.

She suggested surrounding yourself with people who are positive and make you laugh — or finding your own way to humor. 

Comedy show

“Simple ways include watching or reading something funny,” the therapist said. “There is now even a practice called laughter yoga, focused on breathing and simulating laughter.”

“Watch shows that make you laugh, and don’t be afraid to laugh out loud. Go to a funny movie or a comedy show,” Oller suggested. “My favorite way to guarantee a lot of laughing out loud is playing funny board games with friends and family.” 

For more Health articles, visit www.foxnews.com/health

Brides, the therapist, also stressed the importance of finding ways to insert joy and laughter into life. 

“Laughter is free, lacks side effects, and has psychological and physical benefits.”

 

Healthcare execs commonly face threats, says security expert — who wonders why UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson was alone on NYC streets

By
-
0

Healthcare bigwigs like slain UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson regularly field serious threats that warrant security protection, according to an expert whose company has worked for Thompson before.

Questions are swirling over why Thompson wasn’t being guarded when he was gunned down execution-style in Midtown Manhattan Wednesday — with his wife admitting he had received threats over “lack of coverage.”

“I assure you, that company does have an internal security team and staff,” Philip Klein, private security veteran and head of Klein Investigations, told The Post Thursday.

“I know they do, they get a lot of threats from people who have been turned down, a lot of threats due to the cost of healthcare.”

Klein said Thompson’s lack of security in the Big Apple may have been because he refused it.

Security camera footage of Brian Thompson shooter holding up a gun
A gunman shot and killed UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson outside a Midtown Manhattan Hilton Wednesday morning, with no security detail in sight. via REUTERS
Thompson was shot several times by an unknown assailant Wednesday morning, who fled the scene on an electric CitiBike which it’s believed he rode north into Central Park on Center Drive.

New evidence has emerged suggesting the killer may have had an ax to grind with Thompson’s employer, cryptic words discovered written on the bullet casings pointing investigators to a 2010 book called “Delay, Deny, Defend,” which skewers the healthcare industry.

Klein said that it’s “absolutely” gotten more commonplace for high-level corporate executives to have armed security details, particularly those from industries which have put the squeeze on hard-working Americans who are struggling to make ends meet, pushing people to their breaking point.

Brian Thompson
Brian Thompson, 50, was seemingly alone when the shooter ambushed him on the sidewalk. AP
“When you get in peoples’ back pockets throughout the US, the other 90%, people get upset and angry.

“The cost of groceries made people angry at grocery companies. The cost of gas made people angry at the oil industry. Credit card companies, the health insurance industry — people are upset and angry, and small percent of them are going to come after these executives because they blame them,” he warned.

Klein, whose own company personally protected Thompson several times in the ’00s as he delivered speeches in Dallas, said there was an obvious multi-layer failure at play that led to the executive’s violent death.

Hilton Midtown Manhattan entrance.
Philip Klein, head of Klein Investigations in Nederland, Texas, told The Post he was surprised he was ever allowed to walk out of the front of the hotel in the first place. Laura Brett/ZUMA Press Wire / SplashNews.com
“When you’re a corporate CEO, you’ve got two phones on you, you’re worried about the speech you’re about to give, who you’re going to meet, you’re probably having a working breakfast that morning, probably talking to corporate staff, you’re not worried about the world around you,” Klein told The Post.

He pointed to a number of ways the shooter was able to get close enough to the 50-year-old CEO to carry out what police believe was a targeted attack, starting with him being allowed to walk from his hotel across the street to the Hilton, where he was killed.

“Head of a multibillion-dollar corporation walking down the streets of New York City — are you crazy? Are you nuts? What the hell was that about?” he said of the “failure” to keep Thompson safe and questioned why it appeared he was going it alone.

“Was it him being arrogant? Was he trying to hide something? Did he just not like security around him? Did his wife not? That’s the question that needs to be answered by UHS. The next time a CEO comes in and says they don’t want security, you say well then you can’t be CEO of our company.”

As for how Klein would have handled the protection differently?

“If I was his detail leader I’d never have allowed him to go out that front door and down the street. We would have gone through the back, through the conference rooms or entertainment rooms, or gone through the kitchen and had the motorcade set up out the back door and get him in the car,” he shared.

The security expert said he didn’t think the shooter — who was caught on video calmly racking his gun several times as he shot Thompson to death — was a professional because of the trail of evidence he left behind.

“If it was a corporate hit — seen in other countries — would never see this person’s face, would never see how they’re dressed,” he noted. “But now we’ve got pictures of his face. Now we’re gonna find out who he is.”

Klein said his biggest fear is that people will look at Wednesday’s early morning slaying as a fluke occurrence.

“I’m afraid someone will look at this and say ‘he was just a wacko, just a cuckoo,’ but how many of those are out there?”

Actress dies after consuming amphibian’s venom at spiritual cleansing retreat

By
-
0

A Mexican actress is dead after voluntarily participating in a spiritual cleansing ritual during which she reportedly consumed poisonous Amazonian frog venom.

Marcela Alcázar Rodríguez, 33, took some of the poison as part of a spiritual cleansing return that some South American natives have used for toxic cleansing, according to local reports. 

Rodríguez started throwing up and had severe diarrhea.

She first refused help while feeling ill but eventually gave in when her friend visited and her condition worsened, witnesses said.

Marcela Alcázar Rodríguez

Mexican production company Mapache Films confirmed the death, saying she was a “beloved colleague and friend.”

“With deep regret, we mourn the death of our beloved colleague and friend, Marcela Alcázar Rodríguez,” the production company wrote in a social media post.

“Her passing left an immense emptiness in our hearts and in our professional community. Her dedication, joy and commitment left a profound mark on all of us who had the privilege of working beside her.”

A Cuban tree frog is seen in Lake Worth, Fla., in 2010.

Kambo is a South American healing ritual that incorporates the poisonous secretions of a frog, according to Healthline.

“The frog secretes the substance as a defense mechanism to kill or subdue animals that try to eat it. Some humans, on the other hand, apply the substance to their body for its alleged health benefits,” the outlet said.

Police are investigating a shaman’s involvement in the incident.

 

Packers head coach, Lions fan separated on field before rivalry game

By
-
0

Tempers flared early in Detroit ahead of an NFC North matchup with an unusual dispute.

Green Bay Packers head coach Matt LaFleur and a Detroit Lions fan were separated on the field before Thursday night’s clash.

The ruckus appeared to occur right before the national anthem when Lions fans were on the field holding the flag for the game.

Matt LaFleur coaches against the Eagles

Apparently, though, a fan in a Brian Branch jersey took it a bit too far, to the point LaFleur told him to “shut the f— up.”

Several Packers players and referees intervened before the fan walked away, excited about what had just happened.

Fans holding the flag took their phones out to record the argument. 

And it wasn’t an ideal start for the Packers once the game actually started. 

A defensive penalty on a third and goal gave the Lions a fresh set of downs, and David Montgomery ran in for a score on the game’s first drive. After Detroit made it 10-0, the Packers cut into the lead with a Josh Jacobs touchdown in the second quarter.

The Lions took a 17-7 lead into the locker room, but the Packers scored touchdowns on back-to-back drives and benefited from a costly Jared Goff interception to lead 21-17.

Matt LaFleur on field

The Lions and Packers have combined to go 20-4 this season and are first and third in the division, respectively. Detroit is looking to set a franchise record with its 11th straight victory.

Both teams earned home victories on Thanksgiving.

Matt LaFleur looks down at play sheet

The Lions defeated the Packers last month, 24-14, at Lambeau Field.

Follow Fox News Digital’s sports coverage on X, and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.

 

Canada bans more assault firearms, suggests donating guns to Ukraine

By
-
0

Canada on Thursday announced a ban on 324 assault-style firearms in a continued effort for more stringent gun control.

Leaders in Canada also said that they are working with the government of Ukraine to see how the guns can be donated to support the fight against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

“Every bit of assistance we can offer to the Ukrainians is one step toward their victory,” Defense Minister Bill Blair said.

The latest restriction, announced by Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc, also includes investments in border security in an effort to stop smuggling and trafficking, as well as strengthening firearms controls, and tougher penalties for gun traffickers.

National Defense Minister Bill Blair

The restrictions will be implemented immediately, the agency noted.

“This means these firearms can no longer be used,” Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc said.

Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs Dominic LeBlanc

The shoring up of gun control laws in Canada came after the May 2020 ban of 1,500 makes and models of firearms. Last month, that number grew to more than 2,000 as new models were identified.

“Firearms designed for the battlefield plainly do not belong in our communities,” Dominic LeBlanc, Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs, said. “Too often, these types of weapons have been used to commit some of the worst atrocities Canada has ever witnessed.”

Fox News Digital has reached out to Public Safety Canada for comment.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

 

Newsom rails against Trump’s 25% tariff plan during southern border visit: ‘It’s a betrayal’

By
-
0

California Gov. Gavin Newsom railed against President-Elect Trump’s proposal to impose 25% tariffs on goods from Mexico and Canada during a visit to the southern border to announce plans to finish constructing the Otay Mesa East Port of Entry on Thursday afternoon.

Newsom described the tariffs as “one of the biggest tax increases in U.S. history” that would affect Californians’ wallets and small businesses, especially farmers across the Golden State.

“Don’t think for a second this won’t impact you,” Newsom said. “90% of these tariffs will impact bottom of our economic chain, meaning lower wage workers that pay over half of these taxes.”

Gavin Newsom and Donald Trump

“There is no economic growth in America without the success and the vibrancy of this region,” he added.

Calling the tariffs a “betrayal” that is “happening in real time,” Newsom said the new legal crossing would promote two-way trade between Mexico and the U.S. 

“You are being betrayed by these policies,” Newsom said.

“And those farmers and ranchers will be impacted disproportionately if these tariffs go into effect,” he said. “And I didn’t even bring up the mass deportation components of it. You know better than I do when you look at farm workers, the last estimate, roughly half are undocumented.”

In talking about the Ota Mesa Easy Port of Entry, Newsom said he hopes to have it completed by December 2027, with the help of the incoming Trump administration. 

California Governor Gavin Newsom

“We care about border security, but we also care about economic security, and we care about two way trade, and we care about our partners on the other side of this border that have well-established partnerships.”

Newsom also announced a new plan with the California National Guard to strengthen border security by targeting the flow of fentanyl and illegal weapons. Nearly 200,000 illegal migrants cross the border into California daily through ports of entry, according to the San Diego-based Smart Border Coalition in the summer.

The move is part of Newsom’s effort to reframe the conversation around illegal immigration flowing into the blue state as he positions himself for a potential showdown with the incoming Trump administration. This week, Newsom spearheaded an emergency special legislative session, urging lawmakers to approve $25 million to bolster the state’s legal defense against potential federal lawsuits lobbed by Trump.

Migrants surge at California border port of entry

Between 2017 and 2021, California’s Department of Justice led 122 lawsuits against Trump administration policies, spending $42 million on litigation. Newsom’s office said in one case, the federal government was ordered to reimburse California nearly $60 million in public safety grants.

While California filed over 100 lawsuits against the Trump administration, President-elect Donald Trump lobbed only four major lawsuits against the state. 

California, a sanctuary state for illegal immigrants, abortion procedures and transgender transition treatments for children, could be targeted by the Trump administration, especially considering Trump’s mass deportation plan of illegal immigrants. 

Trump called Newsom’s plan an effort to “Trump-proof” the state in a Truth social post last month.

 

‘We’re going to gut the fish’: Republicans give details from closed-door meetings with DOGE’s Musk, Ramaswamy

By
-
0

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congressional Republicans are planning to work closely with Tesla CEO Elon Musk and former presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, the pair co-leading Trump’s newly formed spending cuts project, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

The DOGE duo made their rounds with lawmakers in Washington, D.C. on Thursday, spending the morning with members of the Senate DOGE Caucus before heading to a meeting with House GOP leaders and House DOGE Caucus representatives.

The pair, who will spearhead efforts under President-elect Trump to slash government spending and strengthen government efficiency under the incoming Trump administration, wrapped up their day on Capitol Hill by addressing a joint meeting with Republicans of both chambers.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., incoming chair of the DOGE House subcommittee, revealed that, during the meeting, Musk said there would be a “naughty list” and a “nice list” for lawmakers.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk, co-chair of the newly announced Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), arrives on Capitol Hill with his son on Dec. 5, 2024 in Washington, DC.

“There will be a lot more that is expressed in the days ahead,” Johnson said as he left the meeting. “Stay tuned for more to come.”

Co-chairs of the DOGE House caucus said there was a “big discussion” during the meeting with Musk and Ramaswamy about education and the redundancy of government workers.

“There is so much waste, fraud and abuse. There is so much inefficiency. Where do we begin?” DOGE Caucus co-chair Rep. Aaron Bean, R-Fla., said.

He suggested there was already “low-hanging fruit” for improving government efficiency that Republicans could agree on that included the issues of education and the federal workforce.

“There was a big discussion about education. There was a big discussion about redundancy of government workers as they exist in programs across the country. This was not a ‘pick your program and select it and get agreement.’ This was the idea forum,” said co-chair Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas.

Vivek Ramaswamy, chairman and co-founder of Strive Asset Management, center, arrives to meet with lawmakers on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on Thursday, Dec. 5, 2024.

Sessions also highlighted how the timeframe for DOGE, which is expected to conclude no later than July 4, 2026, on the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence’s signing, will help ensure agency efficiency.

Rep. Troy Nehls, R-Texas, walking out of the meeting, told reporters that “we’re going to gut the fish.”

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, however, was skeptical of them relying on the new department to cut costs. 

“It’s a little rich to go, ‘Oh DOGE, save us.’ What, from ourselves?” Roy told reporters. “What I told them is, their best role is to expose the absolute stupidity coming out of this body.”

Donald Trump and Elon Musk

But Rep-elect Mike Haridolopos, R-Fla., argued it was good to have an outside eye looking at how the federal government is run.

“The lowest-hanging fruit, one overall thing we need to do is eventually pass a balanced budget amendment,” he said of where Congress could help cut waste. “I think the second one is that people have to show up to work. Everybody else in America, they don’t show up to work, they don’t get paid. And so these government employees need to show up to work.”

Ahead of the meeting with Congress, Musk was asked if he wanted Democratic members to be part of DOGE conversations, to which he was heard answering “yes.”

Musk sat down with incoming Senate Majority Leader John Thune on Thursday morning, while Ramaswamy met with the Senate DOGE Caucus to hear from chair Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa., who unveiled a 60-page proposal for potential spending cuts.

 

Another major blue city doubles down on vow to obstruct Trump’s mass deportations plan

By
-
0

The Boston City Council unanimously voted this week to double down on a measure designed to obstruct President-elect Trump’s plans for mass deportations.

According to the Boston Herald, Boston council member Gabriela Coletta said the measure is an important step “as we brace for [the] impact” of a second Trump presidency.

Titled the “Trust Act,” the law was first passed in 2014 and was amended during Trump’s first term in 2019.

It seeks to protect immigrant communities from “unjust enforcement actions” and restricts Boston police’s ability to cooperate with ICE and bans police from keeping migrants in custody for possible deportation unless there is a criminal warrant.

Boston City Hall with flags raised outside

The resolution adopted by the council states that “proposals for mass deportations represent a direct attack on Boston’s immigrant families, and threaten to tear communities apart.”

“In the face of changing federal leadership, the City of Boston must reaffirm our support for the Boston Trust Act to protect our immigrant residents,” the resolution goes on. “The City of Boston shall continue to monitor and respond to federal immigration policies that may impact its residents, reaffirming its commitment to protect immigrant communities from unjust enforcement actions and to uphold the Trust Act, recognizing that protecting the rights and dignity of all residents, regardless of immigration status, is essential for a safe and welcoming city for all.”

According to the Boston Globe, all 13 council members voted to reaffirm the Trust Act on Wednesday.

Per the Boston Globe, Council President Ruthzee Louijeune said that “as the national climate grows increasingly hostile towards immigrant communities, we must reaffirm who we are as a city.”

28-year-old Salvadoran national Bryan Daniel Aldana-Arevalo

“As a city built on the strength of its diverse communities,” she went on, “Boston remains steadfast in its commitment to protecting the rights [and] dignity of all its residents, regardless of status.”

Boston Mayor Michelle Wu, a Democrat, has also vowed the city would not cooperate with Trump and his incoming border czar Tom Homan’s plans for mass deportations.  

“The federal government is responsible for a certain set of actions, and cities, no individual city, can reverse or override some parts of that,” Wu said during a local news interview. “But what we can do is make sure that we are doing our part to protect our residents in every possible way, that we are not cooperating with those efforts that actually threaten the safety of everyone by causing widespread fear and having large-scale economic impact.”

This comes after the Boston area has seen several ICE arrests of illegal immigrants who have been charged with crimes, including child sex offenses, released back onto the streets. 

ICE announced in November that it apprehended a Colombian illegal immigrant, who had been arrested on charges of enticing a child under 16, distribution of obscene matter, and lascivious posing and exhibiting a child in the nude. ICE had filed a detainer against him, but it was ignored, according to the agency.

Boston mayor and Massachusetts governor tour migrant shelter

Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey has similarly said she is prepared to use “every tool in the toolbox” to protect residents, vowing that state police would “absolutely not” assist Trump in the mass deportations operation.

Several other Democratic leaders have also pledged resistance to Trump’s deportation plans, including California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Denver Mayor Mike Johnston.

Johnston got into a spat with Homan after he vowed to have Denver police physically block ICE officials from carrying out deportations and predicted a “Tiananmen Square moment.”

In response, Homan has warned resisters to “get the hell out of the way” and cautioned he is “not afraid” to jail those who illegally obstruct ICE enforcement.

 

Biden team reportedly considering preemptive pardons for Fauci, Schiff, other Trump ‘targets’

By
-
0

President Biden’s White House is reportedly considering preemptive pardons for Dr. Anthony Fauci, Sen.-elect Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and former Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo. 

White House counsel Ed Siskel is arranging discussions about the potential pardons with several other senior Biden aides, including chief of staff Jeff Zients, Politico reported, citing senior Democrats familiar with the talks. 

The president, who granted a sweeping pardon to his son, Hunter, for the past 11 years of crimes or potential crimes earlier this week, reportedly has not been roped in on the deliberations, according to Politico. 

The conversations included whether Fauci, Schiff or Cheney would even accept a preemptive pardon, which could suggest wrongdoing and exacerbate criticisms brought by President-elect Trump’s team. 

“I would urge the president not to do that,” Schiff told Politico. “I think it would seem defensive and unnecessary.”

Fauci testifies before Congress

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for comment but did not immediately hear back. 

Trump’s appointment of Kash Patel to be the next FBI director reportedly drove the talks of preemptive pardons amid concern of possible forthcoming inquiries or indictments once the new administration takes over in January. 

Rep. Brendan Boyle, D-Pa., who hosted Biden in battleground Pennsylvania before the election, called on the president to issue blanket pardons when Patel’s nomination was announced — though he did not specify the intended recipients. 

“By choosing Kash Patel as his FBI Director, Trump has made it clear that he is more focused on settling personal scores than on protecting the American people or upholding the rule of law. Patel has openly published an ‘enemies list’ in his book, naming individuals he and Trump plan to investigate and prosecute — targeting those who stood up to Trump’s lies, abuses of power, and baseless attempts to overturn the 2020 election. This is no hypothetical threat,” Boyle said in a statement. “The people they’re targeting include law enforcement officers, military personnel, and others who have spent their lives protecting this country. These patriots shouldn’t have to live in fear of political retribution for doing what’s right. That’s why I’m urging President Biden to issue a blanket pardon for anyone unjustly targeted by this vindictive scheme.”

Cheney Jan. 6

Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., also spoke in favor of preemptive pardons last week, noting how former President Gerald Ford granted one to Richard Nixon. 

“If it’s clear by January 19 that [revenge] is his intention, then I would recommend to President Biden that he provide those preemptive pardons to people, because that’s really what our country is going to need next year,” Markey told WGBH.

Schiff and Cheney both led the Jan. 6 select committee that investigated the U.S. Capitol riot. 

Schiff Jan. 6

Fauci, the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, is under renewed scrutiny this week in light of the over 500-page final report dropped by the House subcommittee that has been investigating government response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The report — which found that COVID-19 most likely emerged from a laboratory in Wuhan, China — supported how Fauci “played a critical role in disparaging the lab-leak theory” among top scientific circles early in 2020 and later to the public. His congressional testimony to Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., the report states, misled the public regarding National Institute of Health funding of gain-of-function research at coronavirus labs. 

It goes on to cite how Fauci testified that the six-foot social distancing rule imposed on Americans “sort of just appeared” and did not support quality scientific standards, when he was grilled on what studies he and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had reviewed before announcing the policy. He also gave similarly vague testimony when asked what science supported K-12 public school mask mandates. 

 

1...222324...32Page 23 of 32

EDITOR PICKS

POPULAR POSTS

POPULAR CATEGORY

ABOUT US

Newspaper is your news, entertainment, music fashion website. We provide you with the latest breaking news and videos straight from the entertainment industry.

Contact us: rocci@stuccimedia.com

FOLLOW US

© Newspaper WordPress Theme by TagDiv

Stucci Media

Independent News That Matters

Skip to content ↓