There’s much to love about older homes. They often have features rarely seen today, and this tends to add so much charm and character. Odds are, these are just some of the reasons that Josh and Liv found themselves drawn to an older home. In the end, they went with one that was built in the 1960s. Although it isn’t in the best condition, their plan is to renovate it. As you might imagine, doing so comes with lots of unexpected hurdles. Despite knowing the challenges that come with buying an old home, this couple never would have expected this recent discovery. In their kitchen, completely hidden from sight, they found a trapdoor to the basement. But here’s the real kicker: Neither Josh or Liv knew that this basement even existed! Learn more, and get a tour of the massive basement, in the video below. @joshandlivhomereno We couldn’t believe it! Can you guess what else we have found?? #houserenovation #renovationproject #firsthome #dreamhome #ukreno #homeimprovement #fixerupper #diy #basement #unexpected ♬ original sound – Josh & Liv In Their Newly Bought Home, This Couple Discovers a Hidden Trapdoor to a Basement They Didn’t Even Know Existed Despite having the house inspected, it seems the basement remained unknown. Even the previous owners didn’t mention this space — and boy is there a lot of it! Based on the tour the couple gives in the video, it seems the space covers nearly the entirety of the house. What a wild discovery! At the end of the video, the couple alludes to a discovery they made in the basement. Unfortunately, they reveal in another video that there’s asbestos down there. According to many comments, it seems there are safe ways to remove it — but we’ll have to wait for more updates to find out what the couple plans to do with this newly revealed space! “What a find, a house under a house, please update on any renovations you decide to do,” someone shares in the comments, with another adding, “As an introvert, I’d be turning that into a living space to hide from unannounced visitors.” You can find the source of this story’s featured image here! The post New Homeowners Discover Hidden Trapdoor To Basement They Didn’t Know They Had! appeared first on InspireMore.

The claim that the NHC will be eliminated if Project 2025 is implemented is misleading and lacks context

The oldest traces of fermented dairy ever discovered were recently found in western China’s Tarim Basin, dating back 3,600 years. A DNA analysis shows that rather than being cheese, as the physical profile of the sample suggested, it was actually solidified kefir. Kefir is a type of fermented milk that offers a great way of […] The post Dairy Samples from 3,600-yo Mummies Reveal Precise Origins of Kefir in the Human Diet appeared first on Good News Network.

Raising farm animals, or animals in general for that matter, can become costly when it comes feeding time. There is also the ugly truth that much of the store bought farm feed may have traces of chemicals, and honestly, who knows what is really in there. This is why there is such a need to learn and understand how to make your own homemade farm feed.  Homemade Farm Feed I like to know exactly what my animals are eating, so I prefer to make my own variations of fresh feed for the fur and feather babies. If you do not already know what nutritional requirements your animals need, then I highly suggest looking into that. It is also wise to familiarize yourself with the signs and symptoms of deficiencies in order to properly adjust the foods as needed. Before I get on with the edible ingredients I am going to give you a few good reasons to try making your own: You know what it is your animals are getting on a regular basis. You have more control when it comes to making adjustments to their diet whereas store bought food cannot be adjusted you simply get what you get, which can sometimes mean spending more money. Save money on feeding, especially if you free range. Animals are happier with fresher foods if you think about it goats, chickens and rabbits do not run around eating concentrated food pellets. It can be fun and educational if you get the little ones involved. I apologize in advance for the lack of proper measurements as I just go by scoops. If you do not free range your animals you will need to make extra food for them to make up for what they are missing out on. Amazingly enough, animals know what it is they like, dislike, and what they need to eat. Chicken Feed Oats – Peas – Flax – Sesame – Kelp Granules – Oats – Oyster Shell – Coconut Oil – Fresh Kitchen Scraps – Wild Flowers It has been said that chickens need almost all vitamins except for vitamin C. When you make your chicken's feed, keep in mind that vitamins A & D are both important for egg production. Just like humans, chickens require many of the same vitamins and minerals we do and if they lack those vitamins they will show signs. Anytime there is something going on with your birds look into the symptoms of deficiencies and you can likely resolve the problem. Goats & Dairy Goats Corn – Oats – Bran – Molasses – Alfalfa – Sunflower Seeds – Wheat – Barley – Fresh Beans – Beets – Broccoli – Carrots – Pumpkin – Cabbage – Greens – Chard I feel as though it is very important for all animals to get out and free range for part of their diet. Dairy and meat goats alike require calcium and magnesium for milk production and growth. A, D, E and B’s are really important for all goats. They also need very low levels of iodine in their daily diet. Rabbits Rabbits will eat just about everything that is on the goats and chickens list. It is important however to throw in some Timothy and other grasses. A rabbit’s diet should be 75% leafy greens and 25% of everything else. It is always good to research the animals you have, what they need, what they like, and how to know when something is missing from their diet. Part of making homemade farm feed of value is knowing when to add and subtract various dietary needs. If you have any questions concerning animal feed feel free to post it in the comments section. If you have an abundance of fresh goodies but fear they will go bad dehydrate the fruits and veggies and toss it in the dry mix, they’ll love it. As I have mentioned, I feel it is important for animals to be able to have fresh foods in their diets, so whether some are free range or not, be sure to incorporate fresh goodies into the diets of any animals. Animals, much like humans, enjoy nice treats every now and then. Take care of your fur and feathered babies and they will take care of you. These amazing playing cards filled with information on how to grow and sustain your garden! Grab these FREE cards here. Did you like our post on Homemade Farm Feed? Let us know which recipe you are going to try for your animals in the comments section below!  Follow us on instagram, twitter, pinterest, and facebook!  

Milk-Bone introduces their newest dog treats, the ‘Milk-Bone Peanut Buttery Bites’, in new Milk-Bone commercial – a collaboration between the dog treat brand and Jif Peanut Butter. On September 26, the dog treat brand uploaded their brand new commercial, titled “A Collab That Makes Sense” to introduce the collaboration. “Milk-Bone Peanut Buttery Bites is the collab you and your g’boy have been waiting for. Soft & Chewy. Peanut Buttery. Drool-worthy,” the description read. The product is also said to be made with real Jif peanut butter and doesn’t contain any artificial flavors or fillers. In the newest commercial, a woman can be seen holding dog bone-shaped and peanut butter-scented perfume with the label “Milk-Bone X Jif”. The narration says, “Introducing a collab like no other collab that has collab-ed before. A collab so collaborative, it’s almost unimaginable that prior to this, they have not collaborated.” As the woman continues to spray the perfume, she realizes how absurd the product collaboration is. The narration then says, “Milk-Bone and Jif parfum… makes no sense at all” with the model throwing the bottle against a wall and pulling a bag of the ‘Milk-Bone Peanut Buttery Bites‘. The dog statues then come to life and the woman proceeds to give the pooches the dog treats to enjoy. Gail Hollander, chief marketing officer at The J.M. Smucker Co. tells The Drum, “Milk-Bone Soft & Chewy Peanut Buttery Bites give your furry best friend a convenient, delicious way to enjoy his human’s favorite Jif Peanut Butter.” Furthermore, the commercial is only the tip of the iceberg! As The Drum reports that in addition to this commercial, the campaign will also include 15- and 30-second ads for TV and online platforms, influencer partnerships, and social media promotions. Currently, the product is only available at Walmart. However, it will be available in major retailers across the country soon. “A national TV buy expansion is planned for February 2025, coinciding with the product’s availability in major retailers across the country, including Walmart,” The Drum reports. The Drum also reveals that the fragrance in the commercial is not currently available for purchase, but there is a possibility of it being released in the future.

Billy Flynn would be proud.

In 1999, the cult classic film The Matrix asked viewers to contemplate whether human consciousness could exist entirely within a simulated world. Nearly 25 years later, what was once dismissed as science fiction is being seriously considered by some of the world’s leading scientists. The question remains: Is it possible to transfer the mind—a complex network of thoughts, memories, emotions, and consciousness—from a biological body to a computer? While the notion remains far from reality, advances in neuroscience, artificial intelligence, and computational biology have allowed scientists to begin exploring this idea. Opinions on the feasibility of mind-uploading range from hopeful optimism to outright skepticism. Understanding the Human Mind To explore whether consciousness can be transferred to a machine, it’s essential to first understand what we’re trying to upload. The human brain is composed of roughly 86 billion neurons, each of which forms synaptic connections that allow for the transmission of electrical signals. These synaptic connections are what allow us to process information, think, feel, and act. But beyond the biological structure, there is something more intangible: consciousness. Dr. Christof Koch, a neuroscientist and president of the Allen Institute for Brain Science, describes consciousness as “the feeling of what it is like to be you, to have an internal sense of self.” While the brain’s anatomy can be studied in detail, consciousness remains elusive. Many scientists are still unsure how this subjective experience arises from the physical hardware of the brain. This presents a significant hurdle for proponents of mind-uploading. From a biological standpoint, the idea of transferring a mind into a computer presents numerous challenges. First, there’s the issue of mapping the brain’s neural connections. A human brain is so complex that even the most advanced brain-scanning technologies today can only capture a fraction of its processes. In fact, some studies estimate that mapping every synapse in a human brain would require data storage capabilities equivalent to a zettabyte—about 1,000 times the data of the entire internet. Dr. Rafael Yuste, a neuroscientist and one of the pioneers behind the U.S. government’s BRAIN Initiative, emphasizes this point, stating, “We are only scratching the surface in terms of understanding the human brain. We don’t yet know how memories are stored or how consciousness emerges, let alone how to replicate them in a machine.” According to Yuste, creating an exact replica of the brain in a digital format would require understanding every detail of its structure and function, which is currently beyond our technological capabilities. Further complicating matters is the dynamic nature of the brain. The brain isn’t static; it is constantly changing in response to stimuli, forming new connections and discarding old ones. This neuroplasticity suggests that even if we could scan the brain with perfect accuracy, the digital version would quickly become outdated as the biological brain continues to evolve. Rafael Yuste is a Spanish–American neurobiologist and one of the initiators of the BRAIN Initiative announced in 2013. Theoretical Pathways: Emulation and Uploading Despite these challenges, several speculative models have been proposed for mind-uploading. The most commonly discussed approach is whole brain emulation (WBE). Theoretically, this would involve scanning a brain down to the molecular level, creating a precise digital replica, and then running that replica on a powerful computer. One of the leading proponents of this idea is Dr. Anders Sandberg from the Future of Humanity Institute at the University of Oxford. Sandberg and his colleagues argue that while WBE might seem far-fetched, it doesn’t violate any known laws of physics. “In theory, there’s nothing preventing us from simulating the brain, given enough computing power,” says Sandberg. However, he concedes that the technology required for such a task is far beyond what exists today. Another speculative idea is substrate-independent minds (SIMs), proposed by neuroscientist and philosopher Dr. Randal Koene. SIMs suggest that consciousness could be separated from the biological substrate of the brain and uploaded to an entirely different medium, such as a computer. According to Koene, “Our biological minds may one day be able to transcend the limits of the human body and exist on non-biological platforms.” While intriguing, this hypothesis remains largely theoretical, with no experimental evidence to support it. The Role of AI and Neuroscience One avenue of research that is helping scientists better understand the brain is artificial intelligence. In recent years, AI models such as neural networks have been designed to mimic the structure and function of the human brain—albeit on a much smaller scale. These models are helping scientists develop insights into how neural connections lead to learning and memory formation. However, even the most advanced AI systems are still far from replicating human consciousness. Dr. Sebastian Seung, a neuroscientist at Princeton University, argues that while AI might help us model certain aspects of the brain, it won’t necessarily lead to a solution for mind-uploading. “AI is a powerful tool for understanding the brain, but it’s not a replacement for the brain itself,” says Seung. “The human brain is far more complex than any artificial system we’ve created so far.” One notable research effort aimed at understanding the brain’s intricacies is the Human Brain Project (HBP), a large-scale initiative funded by the European Union. The HBP aims to simulate the brain at multiple levels, from molecules to neural circuits. However, the project has been fraught with controversy, with some critics arguing that it overpromises what can be achieved. “There is no evidence that simulating a brain will lead to understanding consciousness,” says Dr. Henry Markram, one of the HBP’s founding scientists. Fringe Theories and Speculative Science In contrast to mainstream neuroscience, there are a few fringe ideas that speculate mind-uploading could be closer than we think. Some proponents believe that advancements in quantum computing could unlock the key to consciousness. According to these theories, consciousness is not purely a biological phenomenon but is instead tied to quantum processes that could theoretically be simulated in a quantum computer. However, most neuroscientists dismiss this idea, citing a lack of evidence and the speculative nature of quantum consciousness theories. Another fringe hypothesis comes from transhumanists, who advocate for the use of technology to enhance and eventually transcend human biology. Ray Kurzweil, a leading figure in the transhumanist movement and director of engineering at Google, has long predicted that humans will achieve mind-uploading by 2045, a concept he refers to as the “Singularity.” However, many scientists argue that Kurzweil’s timeline is overly optimistic. “Kurzweil’s predictions are based more on hope than on hard science,” says Dr. Yuste. “We’re still many decades, if not centuries, away from understanding consciousness, let alone transferring it to a machine.” Consciousness, at its simplest, is awareness of internal and external existence. However, its nature has led to millennia of analyses, explanations, and debate by philosophers, scientists, and theologians. The Road Ahead Even if mind-uploading were technically possible, it would raise significant ethical and philosophical questions. For instance, would a digital copy of a person’s mind be truly “alive”? Would it have consciousness, or would it simply be an advanced simulation? Moreover, if we could upload our minds to computers, what would happen to our biological bodies? These are questions that philosophers and ethicists are beginning to explore as the technology advances. Dr. Susan Schneider, a cognitive scientist and philosopher at the University of Connecticut, argues that mind-uploading may not preserve the essence of human consciousness. “There is a difference between copying a mind and actually transferring consciousness,” she says. “A digital copy of your mind may behave like you, but it wouldn’t be you.” This raises the possibility that mind-uploading could create a new form of being—one that resembles human consciousness but is fundamentally different. Projects like the BRAIN Initiative and the Human Brain Project are helping to map the brain’s neural connections, while advancements in AI and machine learning are offering new tools to study consciousness. However, as Dr. Koch points out, the mystery of consciousness may remain unsolved for generations. “We may one day understand how the brain works in its entirety,” he says, “but that doesn’t mean we will be able to replicate consciousness in a machine.” The post Can We Transfer the Human Mind to a Computer? appeared first on Anomalien.com.

The Left used to pressure reporters trying to be objective by insulting them as “stenographers to power.” You can’t just repeat what the powerful say, they argued. You have to expose them. Well, some of them. We remember all of the lectures during the Trump presidency that all their anti-Trump aggression was just “holding him accountable.” Holding Democrats accountable isn’t really their bag. You don’t win Pulitzer Prizes for damaging Democrats. That’s not landing on the “right side of history.” With Democrats, it’s apparently dangerous to explore if they might be failing. It’s better to just repeat their spin. That’s what stood out on “The NPR Politics Podcast” on September 23. It was short – only 11 minutes. The title? “How Kamala Harris incorporates her biography into her campaign message.” NPR White House reporter Tamara Keith claimed to be struck by Kamala hammering on her middle-class childhood.  “She said, ‘I come from the middle class. I'll never forget that I came from the middle class.’ She also talks, as you say, about having a single mother, immigrant parents,” Keith relayed. “She is placing herself in the American story in a way that I think is authentic to her, but also meant to maximize who she appeals to.” It’s amusing that Kamala’s middle-class mantra is “authentic to her.” She doesn’t come across as authentic when she unloads this speech every single time she’s asked about an economic policy. Worse yet, Keith touted how her campaign sources explain she uses this humble-upbringing line as a contrast with the silver spoon in Trump’s mouth. Keith even repeated Harris’s claim that she worked at McDonald’s one summer in her college years. Reporters at the Washington Free Beacon tracked down a 1987 job application that insisted applicants should list all jobs held in the last ten years. Harris didn’t have McDonald’s on hers. They also found there’s no record of Harris mentioning the McDonald’s job before a labor rally in Las Vegas in June 2019. The job goes unmentioned in both of her memoirs, published in July 2010 and January 2019. NPR reporters aren’t investigating this. They merely repeat her life story without investigating it, just as they did for Barack Obama. Nobody investigated his memoirs. They just repeated his tales in admiring tones. NPR political analyst Domenico Montanaro was impressed with Harris not harping on her gender or race too much, calling it “probably a strong, safe strategy, which makes a lot of sense.” But he said early on, he felt if Harris entered the race, “Trump and Republicans would really struggle in talking about a black woman. And we've seen that play out repeatedly, where it really has sort of become a trap for them.” So they not only explain the Harris strategy, they praise it, and insist Republicans can’t handle a black woman. Your tax dollars at work. The podcast ended with NPR reporter Deepa Shivaram throwing racism and sexism into the mix to explain why Harris doesn’t harp on her race or gender: “This isn't something that she feels like she does have to explain to anyone, let alone the media and largely, like, white reporters who feel the need to ask about this over and over again....We should point out, Donald Trump does not face these questions, and candidates who are white and male don't face these questions either.” No, they face questions about being a racist and sexist who “really struggles in talking about a black woman.” This is why NPR liberals are more excited about Harris’s chances than they were about Biden’s.

Eleven bills and counting. That’s how many pieces of major legislation Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.) has passed with the support of more Democrats than Republicans in his time in office. One for every month he’s had the job. Most recently, on Wednesday night, he passed a three-month continuing resolution to fund the government until December. In contrast, Johnson has accomplished almost nothing that Democrats haven’t supported. Let’s look at specifics. They give you a good look at what the uniparty really cares about. (Spoiler alert: It’s not what a lot of Republican voters care about.) First up, they care about spending huge amounts of your money. Second, they care about war in Ukraine. Third, they care about spying on former President Donald Trump (and you). And finally, they care about George Santos. The first Democrat-led spending bill came quickly into Johnson’s tenure: November 2023, less than a month after he assumed the gavel. Johnson promised to break the fight into two parts, giving Democrats what they wanted and then, after the leverage was gone, picking a much-needed fight on border enforcement. While 93 of the 95 “no” votes came from his own party, the CR funding the government until January passed with 209 Democratic votes and 127 Republican votes. Predictably, the border fight came to naught, and the speaker promised to actually battle it out with the National Defense Authorization Act. While this sort of uniparty kumbaya may be business as usual behind the scenes in DC, it’s unusual to see it practiced so openly and on the record in the House. December came soon enough, but guess what? No fight. This was also predictable. Too many Republican lawmakers worship at the altar of the Pentagon (and the permanent defense industry making billions from it) to ever really have a proper fight over the NDAA. It doesn’t matter that Defense Department leadership and brass have largely devoted themselves to radical Democratic social engineering and critical race theory while at the same time losing wars. If they want money, they get it. And so, on Dec. 14, Johnson passed the NDAA with 163 Democratic yeas and just 147 Republican yeas. It was stripped of any and all measures trying to rein in the Pentagon’s liberal Democratic excesses. In their place, a provision extending the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which the intelligence community used to spy on and sabotage the last Republican president, was added. A whopping 118 Republicans voted no. See you in the new year. Then came the January spending “fight.” Johnson had vowed to take a strong stand, aiming to push through 2023 and start fresh. But, as expected, he didn’t. The House suspended the rules once again, passing a CR to extend funding until March. The vote saw 107 Republicans in favor, 106 against, and 207 Democrats voting yes. After that, Johnson took a quick detour to tax reform. This is something Republicans can usually get behind, but while the moves fulfilled a number of promises Republicans had made to businesses, many couldn’t shake the feeling that it was tailored to K Street lobbyists while Main Street constituents were suffering. More, Democrats included tax credits for illegal immigrants — part of their steady march toward normalizing and justifying mass amnesty. It passed with 169 Republicans yeas and 188 Democratic yeas. But time was running short on that March CR, and Congress had yet to pass a massive, disgusting “omnibus.” (If this seems like a lot of continuing resolutions, it's because Congress hasn’t passed an actual budget by the books since 1996 — before at least one current member was even born.) This one passed with, once again, more Democrats than Republicans. This time: 207 Democratic and 113 Republican yeas to 97 Republican nays. Next came the omnibus bills. Congress was so fond of the idea that it passed two. The first passed with 207 Democratic votes and a mere 132 Republican votes. The second had 185 Democratic votes and just 101 Republican votes. Next up was FISA. Remember FISA? It’s the sort of intelligence tool the state promised to use only against terrorists and other bad guys but then ended up using against all sorts of domestic opponents. Trump remembers FISA. Anyway, this one should have been a slam-dunk “no” from the party the state tried to take down with FISA, but then to assume that, you’d be underestimating just how sycophantic the GOP’s relationship with the intelligence and defense communities is. Johnson flipped on his previous anti-FISA votes, and the reauthorization passed in April with 147 Democratic and 126 Republican yes votes. That same month, uniparty leadership played on Republican devotion to the foreign country of Israel and Democratic devotion to the foreign country of Ukraine, packaging security bills for both with one for countering China in the Indo-Pacific. Johnson won over his Democratic pals by stripping out anything about defending our own country’s borders, and guess what: It passed with 165 Democratic yeas and just 151 Republican yeas. The very next day, for good measure, Johnson sent even more money to Ukraine with the support of 101 Republicans and 210 Democrats. The Republican no votes came in at 112. Democratic nays? Zero. And then you have Wednesday’s CR, which garnered 132 Republican votes but was driven across the finish line by 209 Democrats. Oh, and let’s not forget George Santos. Between passing the NDAA and FISA in December, Republicans took time to expel a Republican for being a liar and possibly a sociopathic con artist, though his flair made him far more entertaining than the many other liars and con artists who voted to expel him. The vote mattered because Republicans held a slim majority and the seat would almost certainly flip to a Democrat in a special election. This, of course, made their stance seem even more principled than usual. Anyway, that vote was contentious: 105 Republicans were in favor of expelling Santos and 112 were against. Unsurprisingly, Democrats came to the rescue, delivering 206 yeas for such a moral cause. Phew. And that’s it. Eleven major votes the Democrats carried for their speaker. While this sort of uniparty kumbaya may be business as usual behind the scenes in D.C., and particularly in the Senate, it’s unusual to see it practiced so openly and on the record in the House. It’s a black mark against Johnson’s leadership but also against the House Republicans’ cohesiveness as an actual party. “Can anyone name a single thing that extreme MAGA Republicans in the House have been able to do on their own to make life better for the American people?” Democratic House Leader Hakeem Jeffries asked reporters after the Wednesday CR. “A single thing? Just one?" Political rhetoric aside, he’s right. I can’t really think of anything. You can certainly blame the slim Republican majority (and some of its more rebellious, camera-hungry members), but its more than that. To date myself, its reminiscent of the scene in Disney’s “ Aladdin” where seven sword-bearing guards cower in fear, pointing to the little monkey and yelling, “He’s got a sword!” That’s a cartoon, but as far as Republican negotiations go, it’s real life. The House of Representatives has a sword but lacks the will to use it for leverage in real time. So the Democrats win again and again. The next test comes in December. That’s when the actual spending battle comes in. If Trump wins in November, it will literally decide whether he can govern in his first year — or whether Democrats will be allowed to box him in to their priorities. Johnson has promised a fight, and it would be nice to see one for once. The new chairman of the Freedom Caucus told the Beltway Brief this week that the caucus would be challenging Johnson’s position in January if he goes back on that pledge. But if history is our guide, it’s not looking so good. Sign up for Bedford’s newsletter Sign up to get Blaze Media senior politics editor Christopher Bedford's newsletter. IN OTHER NEWS Mitch McConnell makes common cause with Zelenskyy as he campaigns for Democrats Volodymyr Zelenskyy quickly captured Republican attention during his U.S. tour by openly attacking the party’s nominee, Donald Trump, and his running mate, Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio). Rumor has it that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who has oddly made Ukraine a cornerstone of his legacy, quietly gave Zelenskyy the green light, boosting the foreign leader’s confidence to meddle in such a close election. That rumor seemed a little far-fetched until Zelenskyy arrived in Washington. The House of Representatives had already responded to the provocation, opening an investigation into the use of Air Force resources to ferry around a foreign surrogate for Kamala Harris. The investigation will go nowhere, as most Republican investigations do, but it at least staked out the House’s position. Meanwhile on the other side of the building, McConnell staked out his position — guiding the Ukrainian leader around Capitol Hill shoulder to shoulder. The outgoing leader’s brashness against his party’s nominee fits with the man — and fits with his intention to bind a potential 2025 Trump administration’s foreign policy by appropriating continued taxpayer funding to Ukraine in a massive, disgusting December omnibus bill. His colleague, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), has gone so far as to propose binding the next three administrations’ foreign policy toward Russia with a 10-year war funding bill. It’s hard not to wonder what the future might look like if more Republican senators showed this type of devotion to American security — and the American worker. Breitbart: McConnell invites Never-Trumper to push more Pentagon spending at GOP Senate lunch