In case people forgot, Harris was kind enough to remind us that this is only her second trip and photo-op at the border that she falsely claimed is secure. Then she lied about asylum, knowing they let every foreigner claim asylum although they are not eligible. We will never get them out, and they will […] The post Scott Jennings Describes Harris’s Border Photo Op in One Phrase appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

Sabrina Carpenter’s song Espresso has been gaining popularity across the country. Everywhere you go, people are singing this catchy tune. Now, fans are requesting a specific remix. After a guest appearance on The Tonight Show, Keith Urban played an incredible banjo cover, and it left fans wanting more. Keith Urban’s Banjo Remix @fallontonight @Keith Urban performs an impromptu version of @Sabrina Carpenter’s “Espresso” with a ganjo! #FallonTonight #TonightShow #KeithUrban #SabrinaCarpenter #Espresso #JimmyFallon ♬ original sound – FallonTonight While on The Tonight Show, Keith Urban surprised Jimmy Fallon and the live audience with an impromptu banjo performance of Espresso. As his fingers strummed the instrument he began to sing the familiar chorus. “Now he’s thinkin’ bout me every night, oh Isn’t that sweet I guess so. Say you can’t sleep, baby I know It’s that me espresso.” Although the lyrics were the same, the tune was now an upbeat banjo melody. Keith Urban’s skills and vocals made the performance quite incredible. As he finished singing, cheers erupted from the audience. Slight Tweaks As the singer continued, he made some slight adjustments. Keith Urban modified some lyrics to say, “I’m working late ’cause I’m a banjo player/ I can’t relate to people who love Slayer.” Fans were adoring his version of the song and are now demanding more. One user commented, “I love when musicians musician.” Another added, “I’m working late bc I’m a banjo player + I can’t relate to people who love Slayer is peak.” A third demanded, “Ok, now we need an official Espresso banjo remix with Keith Urban. Now, please.” We can’t wait to see what Sabrina Carpenter says after seeing the video. Perhaps fans will get their wish, and Keith Urban will release a cover. You can find this story’s featured image here. The post Keith Urban’s Impromtu Banjo Cover Of Pop Hit Has Fans Raving appeared first on InspireMore.

'Harris has you in her sights, too'

“We are not going back,” Vice President Kamala Harris has promised. But where are we heading? And who is being left behind? Concerned Americans asking these questions can find answers at this year’s Climate Week NYC, a gathering of liberal activists and elites who claim that we are heading away from a “fossil-fuel society” and toward a “green economy” that “will drive a seismic change… in the way we build, live, and learn.” Unfortunately, they might be right. Make no mistake, this revolution isn’t the organic byproduct of a free market and a free people, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t happening. For more than two decades, a well-coordinated group of federal bureaucrats, corporate leaders, and radical activists have worked together to transform America from the top down. From the $30 trillion now being managed in ESG funds to the more than 1.4 million electric vehicles sold in 2023, the manifestations of their success are everywhere in American life. A Kamala Harris presidency would represent the culmination of all their efforts. But there’s one major problem with their “push towards unstoppable progress.” When you’re “always moving forward,” you end up leaving a lot of people behind. The people being discarded by the climate change revolution are America’s hardworking men and women, as well as the global poor. The “fossil-fuel society” that they disparage is also the foundation of the American Dream, where everyday people could work hard, get ahead, own things, and pass them on to their children. The reason that affordable, reliable energy is so essential to reducing poverty and creating prosperity in America and around the world is that almost everything we do requires it: modern medicine, clean water, cool homes in the summer, warm homes in the winter, interstate travel, manufacturing products, the list goes on. Those gathered in the City that Never Sleeps this week should consider something as basic as keeping the lights on. In 2020, one in four American households reported struggling to pay their energy bills, and the problem has gotten much worse under the Biden-Harris administration. Since January 2021, the national average price of electricity has increased 30% to nearly 17 cents per KWH according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. For many people, these increases mean monthly bills close to $1000, cutting into working families’ savings and outpacing what most can afford to pay. This energy inflation is aggravating inequality, but it isn’t an inevitable trend. In fact, the national price of electricity increased only 1.5% over four years under President Trump. So, what is causing the exorbitant increase in energy prices? The answer is simple: the Left’s radical climate policies. For evidence, look no further than the vice president’s home state. In California, policies that Kamala Harris endorsed—such as a cap-and-trade carbon tax—have driven prices to nearly 33 cents per KWH, almost double the national average, and left tens of thousands of people in the dark. That’s right, in 2023, 215,000 people in the Golden State had their power disconnected because of inability to pay the state’s exorbitant prices, and by the end of the year 40,000 of those households still had not seen their services restored. Now, many of these families are at risk of homelessness as their residential lease and mortgage terms are violated and homeowners’ insurance policies are canceled because of their inability to keep utilities connected. This, of course, is the exact opposite of the American Dream of ownership and upward mobility. The problem is even worse in developing nations, where 800 million people still live without access to any electricity and 3.3 billion people have access to less electricity than the average American refrigerator. Things are so bad that 2022 was the first year in decades that the number of people with access to electricity decreased. And this trend will almost certainly continue if Kamala Harris and other climate radicals are able to enforce their agenda for another four years. But it doesn’t have to be that way. The good, albeit distressing, news is that this is a self-imposed crisis. If we pursue policies that ban fracking in Pennsylvania, undermine American auto-manufacturers in Michigan, and increase gas prices across the Sun Belt—as progressive Democrats have promised they will do—even more people will be stuck in poverty and darkness.  But policymakers also know how to reduce energy costs and restore the American Dream. In fact, they did just that under the Trump administration, bringing back energy jobs, making the United States an energy exporter for the first time in decades, and saving the average American family $2500 a year compared to what they’re paying today. As more and more Americans lose access to electricity and heat in their homes because of this administration’s radical climate policies, it is a great and tragic irony that Kamala Harris wants to keep them on the dark with respect to her energy plans for the next four years. This article was originally published by RealClearPolicy and made available via RealClearWire. The post Kamala Harris Is Keeping Voters in the Dark appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Elon Musk’s social media platform, X, is now clear to resume its online activities in Brazil with the settlement of one final penalty according to an announcement made last Friday by Brazil’s controversial justice official, Alexandre de Moraes. The supreme justice authority in the country, known as the Federal Supreme Court (STF), had previously sanctioned a nationwide suspension of X in late August, a decree that was sustained by a judicial panel on September 2 following X’s noncompliance with the court’s orders. The controversy originated in the spring when STF’s Minister de Moraes initiated an investigation into Musk and X after the platform refused to heed its censorship demands. Musk was bold in his defiance of the court’s requests to shut down selected accounts in Brazil. He proceeded to critique de Moraes publicly, labeling him a “criminal” and advocating for the cessation of US foreign aid to Brazil. Nonetheless, this incident marks a turning point in the ordeal. Earlier this month, X submitted official documentation to Brazil’s supreme court indicating their compliance with the court’s instructions, a stance diverging from their previous rebellious approach. However, as reported by Brazil’s G1 Globo, X still holds the responsibility of settling a new fine of 10 million reals (approximately $2 million) to close the chapter on two further days of noncompliance with court orders. Rachel de Oliveira, X’s legal representative in Brazil, is also obligated to settle a 300,000 real penalty. The situation escalated in mid-August, when Musk opted to shutter X’s Brazilian offices, thereby leaving the company devoid of a mandated legal representative in the country for its continued operations. As a consequence, the absence of this representation led the STF to initiate restrictions on the organization’s business assets within Brazil, affecting both X and Musk’s additional venture, Starlink. Influential individuals in Brazil, such as former President Jair Bolsonaro, have been heavily critical of STF’s measures to clamp down on online so-called “hate speech” and “misinformation.” Musk himself has called for retribution against President Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silv and Moraes, the latter of whom was a staunch advocate of these federal regulations. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Elon Musk’s X Set to Reboot in Brazil After Final Fine Payment appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Ah, elections—the pinnacle of democracy where the common folk cast their ballots and, ideally, choose their fate. But hold onto your hats, because behind the grandeur of the European Parliament elections this year lurked a very different sort of governance, one executed not in the open streets but in algorithmic backrooms. Welcome to the Age of Censorship-as-a-Service, brought to you by our ever-dependable friends at Meta, Google, and TikTok. Meta’s Mission: Make the Truth More… Manageable Let’s begin with Meta. In a move that feels like something out of a dystopian satire, Meta proudly announced they had reduced the reach of tens of millions of posts across Europe. They wielded over 150,000 Facebook fact-checking articles to de-escalate the virality of 30 million pieces of content. According to Meta, this wasn’t censorship—no, it was a mere “scaling of the work of independent fact-checkers.” The way they tell it, this was all in the name of maintaining “informed and reliable discussions.” Ah, reliable discussions, where only pre-approved, EU-certified opinions are allowed to flow freely. Related: EU Regulators Seek to Formalize “Disinformation Code” Under Censorship Law Of course, official government statements and the edicts from the holy temples of global health organizations were entirely exempt from Meta’s moderating fervor. After all, why impede the credibility of those who are never wrong—except, of course, when they are, but let’s not get hung up on inconvenient details like that. On Instagram, another Meta product, this brave new moderation mission persisted. The platform used 39,000 fact-checking articles to put the brakes on nearly a million posts. That’s right—one million “potentially hazardous” thoughts and opinions that, for the good of humanity, needed a little algorithmic throttle. And if you were wondering, it wasn’t just the memes of conspiracy theorists—they made sure that you, your grandma, and that neighbor with too many political opinions got the message too: “Play nice, or we’ll see to it no one hears you.” TikTok: Suppressing, But Make It Fashionable Meta wasn’t the only digital nanny keeping Europeans in line. Over at TikTok, the playbook got even hazier. The platform took pride in admitting that it restricted misleading posts—though, unlike Meta, TikTok kept the numbers conveniently vague. You see, their strategy was more about “awareness,” guiding content creators with a gentle algorithmic shove away from the tempting edges of disinformation. How thoughtful. As if to prove their dedication to curated reality, TikTok also pointed Irish users in the direction of fact-checks from TheJournal.ie, an outlet that coincidentally receives EU funding. No conflict of interest there, right? Just an honest effort to “raise awareness.” And while TikTok didn’t offer up the numbers, we can be assured that plenty of thumbs danced across phone screens only to find their intended messages conveniently dulled down or disappeared. Google: Where Terms of Service Are Optional And then we have Google, that beacon of a supposedly neutral search engine—except when it isn’t. Reports show that YouTube, under Google’s magnanimous ownership, automatically deboosted videos that complied with their very own terms of service. Yes, you read that right. Even when content passed muster by their own rulebook, some unseen hand deemed it “unworthy.” Google tells us this was to curb the spread of misinformation. A noble aim, except for that pesky issue of who gets to decide what counts as misinformation—and why. Critics, like Tom Vandendriessche, an MEP for Patriots for Europe, have not been fooled by the big, earnest proclamations of “integrity protection.” Vandendriessche—whose party has fought and won against Big Tech’s silencing efforts—paints a stark picture of unchecked power: tech companies with unprecedented influence, deciding who gets heard and who doesn’t. “This could lead to an era of ‘techno-communism,'” Vandendriessche argued to Brussels Signal, where an unelected cabal decides what constitutes reality for the rest of us. A “techno-communism” where, if your thoughts don’t align with the given narrative, they might as well not exist. It’s not like Vandendriessche is shouting into the void, either. His criticism comes backed by experience, his party having already tasted the bitter fruits of deplatforming. If a democratically elected official can’t even get his voice out there without tech giants intervening, what hope is there for the average citizen with an inconvenient truth? The EU’s Seal of Approval: Trust Us, We’re Here to Help But let’s not forget the EU brass, who are, predictably, patting Big Tech on the back. Věra Jourová seems to believe they’ve stumbled onto some grand new way to “protect the integrity of elections.” Their stance on Big Tech’s secretive influence campaign was remarkably sunny—because nothing says “protecting democracy” like a few ultra-rich corporations quietly deciding what can or cannot be said during election season. What’s fascinating is the conviction with which the EU spins this story. They genuinely believe—or want us to believe—that this centralized control is for our benefit, a way to combat the terrifying specter of “disinformation.” Clearly, the best way to fight misinformation is to silence millions of voices, all while exempting the officials and organizations whose statements are apparently beyond reproach. Trust us, they say: We’re only limiting the information you receive for your own good. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Newly Released Documents Reveal Big Tech Limited Millions of Posts During EU Elections appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), has expressed keen interest in gathering testimony from an FBI analyst. This specific analyst previously affirmed the legitimacy of Hunter Biden’s laptop – infamously referred to as the “laptop from hell” – to Twitter moderators, even as the social media platform was suppressing The New York Post’s explosive report concerning the device’s contents. Chairman Jordan penned a letter last Thursday, acquired by The New York Post, in which he requested a verbatim transcript from an anonymous FBI employee. The staff member of the FBI purportedly made significant contributions to the bureau’s initiatives to silence factual information linked to the Biden family’s alleged wheelings and dealings, which emerged shortly ahead of the hard-fought 2020 presidential election. A substantial part of the Chairman’s letter conveyed disappointment with the FBI’s decision to disregard direct queries from social media platforms regarding confirmation of the laptop’s authenticity, despite owning the laptop for close to a year and having confirmed its content. This action from the bureau allowed social networks to blunt The New York Post’s breaking news based on the inaccurately perceived notion that it was the byproduct of Russian disinformation. On the road to the 2020 election, bureau officials held numerous meetings – over 30 in total – with Twitter and other key social media channels. Their primary narrative focused on possible Russian operations aimed at divulging damaging information about the Biden family, especially Hunter Biden’s alleged exploitation of his father’s high-ranking position within his lucrative board membership at the Ukrainian energy corporation, Burisma Holdings. When an article exposing Hunter Biden’s introduction of a Burisma executive to his then-vice president father surfaced on Twitter on October 14, 2020, it was promptly stifled. This occurred despite an FBI analyst airing the laptop as “real” during a separate call with Facebook, before interruption by a member of the bureau’s General Counsel’s Office. Other communications clarified that there was no evidence to imply Hunter Biden’s laptop was instigated by Russian misinformation. These disclosures, unfortunately, were left unmentioned in their dealings with Twitter, Facebook, and Google. Due to these strategic omissions, Chairman Jordan pointed out, social media platforms perpetuated stymieing the narrative, leaning on earlier cautions issued by the FBI. The FBI, atypically reticent, validated the materials on Hunter Biden’s discarded laptop, according to testimony provided to the House. Despite these revelations, service members hailing from within the bureau professed unawareness about its origins. Parallel to these events, 51 preceding intelligence officials distributed a letter disparaging The New York Post’s coverage of emails secured from Hunter Biden’s laptop; a move triggered by a call between then-advisor to the Biden campaign, Antony Blinken, and ex-CIA Director Michael Morell. They reasoned that the emails bore the hallmarks of a conventional Russian information operation which was used to push for online censorship. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post House Committee Pushes for FBI Testimony on Suppressed Hunter Biden Laptop Story appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

Is Washington Distorting the Numbers?

Report: New Leader of Hezbollah Already Killed by IDF

Here Are a Few Flashbacks to Prove Yet Again That Kamala Harris Is Lying About Wanting a Secure Border