On the latest episode of “The Tony Kinnett Cast,” we discuss pagers in Lebanon and examine the complete failure of two separate interviews with Vice President Kamala Harris and what they mean for both the Biden-Harris administration and the Harris-Walz campaign. Speaking of the campaign, where is the bump in polls after the debate, and what does former president Donald Trump’s second survived assassination attempt have to do with it? We stop in with Dr. Lindsey Burke, director of the Center for Education Policy at the Heritage Foundation, to chat about an overdue tool for students and parents considering college choices in an age where academics aren’t the priority at many institutions. The latest data visualization tool from Heritage makes a serious attempt to bridge the gap between data and those trying to make sense of it. Israeli intelligence shook the world today when a series of pager explosions in Lebanon showcased a serious breach of security, a worse breach of common sense, and a critical victory in Israel’s war against Iranian proxy terror networks like Hezbollah of Lebanon, the Houthis of Yemen, and Hamas of Gaza. Finally, we break through a bit of culture and entertainment to round off an already crazy week of news and insanity! Catch the live radio show and livestream weeknights at 7 p.m. EDT on The Daily Signal’s YouTube, X, or Facebook—and subscribe to the podcast so you never miss an episode or exclusive interview! P.S. Check out our interview with Victor Davis Hanson here. The post WATCH: Pager? I Hardly Know Her! appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Want to test your chocolate bar knowledge? If you really love your chocolates, then prove it! Take this short quiz and see if you can guess the chocolate bar! Can You Guess The Chocolate Bar? A lot of people have a sweet tooth. I'm not ashamed to admit that I have one too, probably more than one, if you would consider the amount of sweets that I eat on a daily basis. And the chocolate bar has always been one of my favorites. Whenever I feel a hunger coming on, I grab a bar and carry on. But knowing is totally different from eating. You may be gobbling up chocolate bars on the regular but do you think you can name them all? Test your chocolate bar I.Q. with this quiz! Guess The Chocolate Bar: [click here if the quiz does not appear below]     That quiz was a tough one! How many did you get right? Share your results below in the comments! Enjoyed this quiz? Check out these posts that will satisfy any chocolate craving: The Best Winter Hot Chocolate Recipe How to Make Hot Chocolate with a Twist This Chocolate Chip Cookie Recipe List Is Your New Best Friend Want more homesteading tricks, tips, and tidbits. Subscribe to our Newsletter! You’ll also be given access to exclusive offers on the latest homesteading essentials. Take another quiz: Which Pizza is Your Soulmate?

When Donald Trump sat down with the National Association of Black Journalists on July 31, the tone was combative and those interviewing him insisted on doing live fact-checking. On Tuesday, it was Kamala Harris’s turn for a much softer interview that saw the on-the-spot fact-checking go away despite multiple factually incorrect statements and be replaced with questions about how the GOP has "weaponized" her laughter. Politico White House correspondent Eugene Daniels kicked off a series of softballs where he invited Harris to explain why, in her opinion, voters are better off than they were four years ago. NPR Fresh Air host Tonya Mosley followed up with another softball, “What plans will you propose to guarantee that families can actually afford childcare and elder care?”   Another softball from NPR's Tonya Mosley: Tonya Mosley "What plans will you propose to guarantee that families can actually afford childcare and elder care?" Harris: "My plan is that no family, no working family should pay more than 7% of their income in childcare." pic.twitter.com/oMvp4d4E5C — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) September 17, 2024   Throughout, Harris gave long-winded answers, and after she claimed “no working family should pay more than 7% of their income in childcare,” TheGrio White House correspondent Gerren Keith Gaynor invited her to simply give a stump speech, “What is your message to young black male voters who feel left out of this economy and how can your economic policies materially change your lives?" When the tough questions began, they were from the left, as Mosley asked about Gaza, “Where do you see the line between aggression and defense and our power as Israel's ally to do something?” After Harris replied with typical liberal clichés about a two-state solution, Mosley tried again, “What levers does the U.S. have to support Palestinians in their right to self-determination? And is it even possible as Israel's ally?" For her part, Harris hyped the administration’s desire that "there be no reoccupation of Gaza, that there be no changing of the territorial lines in Gaza."   Mosley asks a tough question, sort of, but its from the left: "where do you see the line between aggression and defense and our power as Israel's ally to do something?Harris: *typical Democratic two-state solution cliche* pic.twitter.com/0yBdpU0dSQ — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) September 17, 2024   Daniels still was not happy as he pressed, "Is there a specific policy change that you as president of the United States would say you would do that would help this along?” After Harris dodged the question, Daniels also tried again, “But in the way we send weapons and the way we interact as their ally. Are there specific policy changes?”     Daniels: "Is there a specific policy change that you as president of the United States would say you would do that would help this along? Harris: *dodges* Daniels: "But in the way we send weapons and the way we interact as their ally. Are there specific policy changes? pic.twitter.com/eEea6O44OU — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) September 17, 2024   This time Harris hyped Biden’s decision to suspend 2,000-pound bomb shipments, Daniels suggested that wasn’t good enough, “What do you say to those that say that's not enough? That stopping the 2,000-pound bombs, the one time, wasn't enough that this administration and your possible administration has to do more." Switching gears, Gaynor asked about a proposal to create a reparations commission, “Would you as president take executive action to create this [reparations] commission?” Harris danced around the specific issue, but said, “We just need to speak truth about history in spite of the fact some people are trying to erase history and trying to teach our children otherwise." There was no fact-check of that from the stage. Ultimately, Harris would say Congress should tackle the issue.   Gaynor: "Would you as president take executive action to create this [reparations] commission? Harris: "we just need to speak truth about history in spite of the fact some people are trying to erase history and trying to teach our children otherwise." Fact Check: Missing pic.twitter.com/BL1DUUJxXD — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) September 17, 2024   Also avoiding a fact-check was Harris’s statement on JD Vance, Springfield, and bomb threats, “When you have that kind of microphone in front of you, you really ought to understand at a very deep level how much your words have meaning." Switching gears yet again, Mosely lamented an assault weapons ban may be insufficient to solving crime in places like Philadelphia, “How will you address the issue of the use of handguns because a push for an assault weapons ban only addresses a significant but small part of the problem.” Harris suggested the need for “universal background checks,” but Mosely was unconvinced, "In many instances, those handguns aren't even bought lawfully.”   Mosely: "How will you address the issue of the use of handguns because a push for an assault weapons ban only addresses a significant but small part of the problem" Harris: "need universal background checks" Mosely: "In many instances, those hand guns aren't even bought lawfully" pic.twitter.com/lpRb8eBMtH — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) September 17, 2024   Then a miracle happened as Daniels inquired about Harris’s abortion stance, “Do you similarly support also codifying Roe’s restrictions, which allowed states to ban abortion in the third trimester of pregnancy unless necessary to save the mother's life?" Harris dodged the question and Gaynor got things back on the liberal tracks with the dumbest question of the session, "Republicans have at times weaponized you laughing in campaign ads, for example. Why is joy important to you to insert into this election and what do you make of Republicans using that as a way to suggest you're not a series candidate?” Daniels got the final question of the interview, and he wondered in the aftermath of the second assassination attempt on Trump, “Do you have full confidence in the Secret Service to protect all of you?"   And back on schedule, Gaynor asks "Republicans have at times weaponized you laughing in campaign ads for example. Why is joy important to you to insert into this election and what do you make of Republicans using that as a way to suggest you're not a series candidate?" pic.twitter.com/emnVmsfVlg — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) September 17, 2024   Harris affirmed, “I do,” before going on a wild bender, “there are far too many people in our country right now who are not feeling safe. I mean, I look at Project 2025 and I look at, you know, the Don't Say Gay Laws coming out of Florida. Members of the LGBTQ community don't feel safe right now. Immigrants or people with an immigrant background don't feel safe right now. Women don't feel safe right now.”   Daniels: "Do you have full confidence in the Secret Service to protect all of you? "Harris: "I do...I look at Project 2025..Don't Say Gay laws coming out of Florida... the LGBTQ community... Immigrants...Women don't feel safe right now" Mosley: "Thank you so much for your time" pic.twitter.com/loQJtLUucO — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) September 17, 2024   After that crazy statement, Mosley brought the proceedings to a close, “Madam Vice President, thank you so much for your time,” as she naturally avoided fact-checking “Don’t Say Gay.”

An unruly mob of Jew haters served as a live example for Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) to illustrate to a Senate committee hearing on antisemitism just how viscous the problem has become. “F*cking Jews and the Israelis,” shouted an angry Arab man who stood up and disrupted the hearing as Cruz was speaking, on Tuesday. “Fucking Jews…fuck Israelis.” The Senate Judiciary Committee has refused to hold a hearing on antisemitism for the last year. They held one today on “all forms of hate.” It was interrupted by horrific antisemites. Maybe now the Senate will take antisemitism seriously?! pic.twitter.com/Yh6Wi2cJlc — Shabbos Kestenbaum (@ShabbosK) September 17, 2024 “Talk about the 40,000. Talk about all these people. Why is it about antisemitism?” the man continued as Capitol security officers began escorting him away. The auditorium seats were packed with a loud audience of fellow terrorist sympathizers donning keffiyehs.     “You’re now seeing the hate manifesting right here, interestingly enough,” Cruz responded. “We now have a demonstration of antisemitism,” he added. Before being interrupted, Cruz was in the middle of listing hate crimes that demonstrates how “college campuses in particular have become vile incubators of hatred of Jews.” For example, he mentioned, one Cornell University student made “vile threats” to his Jewish classmates, in the midst of the Hamas terrorist attacks on October 7, 2023. "If I see a pig male Jew, I will stab you and slit your throat. If I see another pig female Jew, I will drag you away and rape you and throw you off a cliff," the threats included. Cruz also called out a student organization at California State University for celebrating the Hamas paragliders who “descended upon” a music festival in Israel that day, before raping their victims and murdering 260 attendees in total. At Columbia University, he recalled how the situation grew dangerous to the point where their campus Rabbi advised that all Jewish students must go home for their own safety. “Throughout all of this, the Biden-Harris administration has been utterly absent,” Cruz reminded his fellow lawmakers. “Does anyone doubt if the Klan were on college campuses, terrorizing African American students, threatening African American students, that we would see the FBI there? That we would see prosecutors there? That we would see federal funding cut off to universities?” he asked. “Of course we would, and we should. But when it comes to antisemitism, the Democrats have a problem.” Just this past weekend, a violent gang of thugs beat up a Jewish student at the University of Michigan after asking him to confirm he’s a Jew.

The other day I learned a stunning fact: 97% of Americans who have had sex-change surgery "report an increase in life satisfaction." Ninety-seven percent! And here I'd thought carving up perfectly healthy sex organs in the name of gender ideology was a bad idea. At best, these interventions offer a cosmetic approximation of the opposite gender. But the deeper issues — the feelings of inadequacy, the desire to escape the body’s imperfections — remain unresolved. But just as I was about to send a hefty reparations check to Dylan Mulvaney's mangina fund, I had a strange urge to do something you're never supposed to do — especially since COVID. I decided to do my own research. You'll never guess what I found! Peer-reviewed superstition Sometimes the truth is elusive, hiding behind layers of complexity, fatigue, and our own impatience. So in the absence of certainty, we improvise. We adopt superstitions. It’s human nature to crave certainty, even if it’s only through rituals as bizarre as relying on a groundhog in Punxsutawney to predict the weather. But these rituals, in all their absurdity, offer a glimpse into a deeper yearning: our desperation to make sense of an unpredictable world. In a society increasingly dominated by subjective narratives, we’ve reached a point where “my truth” is wielded as both shield and sword. "My truth" often serves as an escape route for the intellectually lazy — a neat deflection from critical scrutiny. But it’s a slippery slope. Once we accept subjective truth as reality, we risk eroding the very foundations of rational inquiry. Which brings us to the tension between superstition and academia. While superstition is openly irrational, academic research, for all its claims to rigor, is not always as pristine as we’d like to believe. After all, what distinguishes peer-reviewed nonsense from folklore when it carries an agenda? The 97% But let's go back to that miraculous figure for a moment. There it was in Harper's magazine, right near the bottom of its beloved Harper’s Index: “The percentage of Americans who have had gender-affirming surgery who report an increase in life satisfaction: 97%.” The data, it turns out, comes from the National Center for Transgender Equality, a highly partisan organization whose primary aim is to advance transgender rights. In the most generous interpretation, the organization's findings here are more of a glossy advertisement than a meaningful contribution to science. Ninety-seven percent? That’s near perfection. It’s a number designed to elicit unquestioning acceptance. Yet it’s also wildly suspicious. Can 97% of people be satisfied with anything in life, let alone something as complex and life-altering as "gender reassignment" surgery? The answer, of course, is no. The truth, as is often the case, is far messier. Selling trans For one thing, that 97% figure seems to suggest that "gender-affirming" surgery is the silver bullet for everything from body dysphoria to depression. Yet it overlooks the many other factors that play a role in these issues — factors like underlying mental health conditions, social support, or the broader cultural climate. It’s not the surgery itself that guarantees happiness; it’s the narrative surrounding it that’s being sold here. It’s a tactic we’ve seen before, in various political movements. Statistics get massaged, manipulated, or cherry-picked to support a particular agenda. In this case, the survey that produced this miraculous number wasn’t conducted by an independent body, but by activists deeply invested in the outcome. It’s hardly the kind of rigorous, objective research that we should be relying on to make public policy decisions. The survey itself was distributed online, targeting self-identified transgender individuals, including those as young as 16. The participants were asked a range of questions, but the focus was clearly on affirming the benefits of gender transition. This is not scholarly analysis; it’s activism masquerading as research. Assigned at birth? One of the key tenets of transgender ideology and, by extension, this survey is the notion that gender is “assigned at birth.” This phrasing has become ubiquitous, but it’s also deeply misleading. Biological sex isn’t assigned at birth — it’s observed. The idea that a doctor arbitrarily decides a baby’s gender based on genitalia is an absurd distortion of basic biology. The ideological notion of gender has enough wiggle room for interpretation, partly because activists are shifty with definitions, but the “assigned at birth” notion is patently false. It’s a conspiracy that claims, as Planned Parenthood puts it, “Sex is a label — male or female — that you're assigned by a doctor at birth based on the genitals you're born with and the chromosomes you have. It goes on your birth certificate.” To claim that sex is “assigned” is to deny an objective reality that has existed for millennia. This notion, as argued by figures like Richard Dawkins, turns science into a tool of ideology, distorting facts to fit a social narrative. And while we might tolerate such intellectual contortions in everyday conversation, they become far more dangerous when they underpin public health policies or educational curriculums. Drowning in data The survey behind the 97% figure boasts an impressive sample size — over 90,000 respondents. But size alone doesn’t guarantee accuracy. In fact, the larger the sample, the easier it becomes to manipulate the data to fit a predetermined narrative. For instance, the survey’s demographic breakdown shows a disproportionate number of respondents who are young, white, and nonbinary — a group that is hardly representative of the broader transgender population. Moreover, many of these respondents are still grappling with the initial stages of transition. Their short-term experiences cannot be extrapolated to the entire transgender community, let alone used to justify sweeping claims about life satisfaction post-surgery. And let’s not overlook the fact that most respondents didn’t claim to have experienced any significant harassment or violence due to their gender identity. Yet this survey is being used to support the narrative that transgender individuals face widespread persecution, fueling the push for ever more extreme measures to "protect" them. Social contagion There’s another factor at play here that no one seems willing to talk about: social contagion. The sudden spike in the number of young people identifying as transgender isn’t just a reflection of newfound acceptance. It’s also a product of peer influence, media saturation, and the ever-expanding reach of activist groups. A few years ago, Psychology Today ran a listicle titled “10 Things Parents of Trans Kids Want to Know.” The author, Devon Frye, is not a medical expert of any kind, as is often the standard for Psychology Today. Instead, she’s a journalist, an editor. “But the idea 'that social influence can make a child start a journey that was never going to be theirs — and stay on it — is a myth.' Wald notes: 'The social contagion theory is not supported by scientific evidence.'” How else to explain the massive increase in minors diagnosed with gender dysphoria — 42,000 last year, up from just 15,000 five years ago? When children are encouraged to question their gender before they even understand what it means, we risk turning a genuine struggle for identity into a passing fad. The truth, as uncomfortable as it may be to some, is that no surgery or hormone treatment can change a person’s sex. At best, these interventions offer a cosmetic approximation of the opposite gender. But the deeper issues — the feelings of inadequacy, the desire to escape the body’s imperfections — remain unresolved. In the end, perhaps we all struggle with some form of discontent about our bodies or identities. Maybe that’s what drives the human condition: the search for peace in a world that never quite fits. But the answer to that struggle isn’t to sever ourselves from reality. It’s to face it head-on, to accept that imperfection is part of what makes us human. And no statistic, no matter how inflated, can change that truth.

Hip-hop mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs was arrested Monday in New York City. The indictment was unsealed Tuesday morning, and it outlined three federal charges against the rap star.The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York presented charges against Combs for racketeering conspiracy, sex trafficking, and interstate transportation for prostitution.'The freak offs sometimes lasted days at a time, involved multiple commercial sex workers, and often involved a variety of narcotics — such as ketamine, ecstasy, and GHB [gamma hydroxybutyrate] — which Combs distributed to the victims to keep them obedient and compliant.'According to the indictment, “Members and associates of the Combs Enterprise engaged in, and attempted to engage in, among other activities, sex trafficking, forced labor, interstate transportation for purposes of prostitution, coercion and enticement to engage in prostitution, narcotics offenses, kidnapping, arson, bribery, and obstruction of justice.” U.S. Attorney Damian Williams told reporters during a Tuesday press conference, "A year ago, Sean Combs stood in Times Square and was handed a key to New York City. Today, he's been indicted and will face justice in the Southern District of New York."Federal prosecutors are seeking to detain Combs ahead of trial. "So we will be seeking detention," Williams said. "There is a presumption of detention in a case like this, and we think that's warranted."Williams was asked if Combs could be in danger while behind bars — a reference to the death of Jeffrey Epstein in jail. "We are concerned with anyone's safety whenever they are detained prior to trial, it's part of our obligation," Williams responded. "But I do not draw any sort of connection between Jeffrey Epstein's suicide and what may or may not happen to any other defendant while they are detained pretrial. Our position is that pretrial detention is warranted [for Combs] under the law and based on the facts of this case."Williams declared that the investigation was not done and refused to take future charges off the table."This investigation is ongoing, and I encourage anyone with information about this case to come forward and to do it quickly," he stated.Williams added, “Between at least 2008 and the present, Combs abused, threatened, and coerced victims to fulfill his sexual desires, protect his reputation, and conceal his conduct.”He continued, “Sean Combs led and participated in a racketeering conspiracy that used the business empire he controlled to carry out criminal activity, including sex trafficking, forced labor, kidnapping, arson, bribery, and the obstruction of justice.” According to prosecutors, Combs “engaged in a persistent and pervasive pattern” of physical, verbal, emotional, and sexual abuse “toward women and other individuals.”The complaint also alleges that on numerous occasions, Combs “assaulted women by, among other things, striking, punching, dragging, throwing objects at, and kicking them.”The indictment claims Combs used his businesses and employees “to carry out, facilitate, and cover up his abuse and commercial sex.” According to the complaint, the businesses included Bad Boy Entertainment, Combs Enterprises, and Combs Global.He 'subjected victims [to] physical, emotional, and verbal abuse so that they would participate in the freak offs.'Prosecutors alleged Combs was able to garner “absolute loyalty” from business members through “acts of violence and threats.” The Combs Enterprise reportedly avoided detection for illegal activities through “acts of intimidation, manipulation, bribery, and threats of retaliation against individuals who witnessed the crimes committed by members and associates of the enterprise.”The alleged physical abuse victims purportedly were inflicted with injuries that would take “days or weeks to heal."The indictment describes sex acts known as “freak offs,” for which Combs allegedly organized the transportation of sex workers across state lines and internationally — and often recorded them.Williams told reporters, "The freak offs sometimes lasted days at a time, involved multiple commercial sex workers, and often involved a variety of narcotics — such as ketamine, ecstasy, and GHB [gamma hydroxybutyrate] — which Combs distributed to the victims to keep them obedient and compliant.” The sex acts also involved IV fluids and lighting, according to the three-count indictment.During these sex performances, Combs is alleged to have “subjected victims to physical, emotional, and verbal abuse.” The victims were reportedly threatened with a loss of income or livelihood if they declined to participate in the sex parties.Williams claimed Diddy would become “violent” when he “didn’t get his way," adding that he "subjected victims [to] physical, emotional, and verbal abuse so that they would participate in the freak offs."Williams also noted evidence of the freak offs — "electronic devices that contain images and videos of the freak offs with multiple victims" — seized from raids on Combs’ properties in Miami and Los Angeles in March.Federal prosecutors said more than 1,000 bottles of baby oil and other lubricants were seized from Combs' homes that were used in these sex performances. Law enforcement also seized three AR-15 rifles, ammunition, and a large-capacity drum magazine. The serial numbers on the AR-15s had been defaced, according to prosecutors.Following Combs' arrest Monday, his attorney — Marc Agnifilo — described the entertainment mogul as “an innocent man with nothing to hide.”“To his credit, Mr. Combs has been nothing but cooperative with this investigation, and he voluntarily relocated to New York last week in anticipation of these charges,” Agnifilo said. However, Williams disagreed and stated: “Generally, and with increasing frequency, the word cooperative or cooperating has taken on tremendous elasticity, and it no longer really bears any relation to what the word means when we use it in a very specific context. Responding to lawful process and the like does not qualify as cooperation when we use that term here.”If convicted on all charges, Combs faces up to life in prison.In May, disturbing footage surfaced of Diddy brutally assaulting his former girlfriend Casandra Ventura at a California hotel in 2016. The Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office said the rapper would not be prosecuted.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

While Americans have been focused on the election, the European Union has been in the process of passing a new law. It’s called the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, and its reach will go far beyond European borders. In fact, “It’s going to impact every single American,” Justin Haskins, author and editorial director of the Heartland Institute, tells Allie Beth Stuckey. “Essentially, what it does is create ESG social credit scores for companies. ... These ESG scores are designed to transform the way companies operate, the kinds of products and services that they can sell, and then, by extension, transform societies around it,” Haskins explains. So what does a company’s social credit score depend on? - YouTube www.youtube.com Apparently, a variety of measures are used to determine a company’s credit score — things like “climate change,” “biodiversity,” “land and water use,” “social justice,” “LGBTQ” causes, and diversity in general. “How diverse is your board of directors? How diverse is your management team? Like these are the kinds of things that are in these ESG scores,” says Haskins. Even though the United States doesn’t have a social credit scoring law (most ESG initiatives exist in the private sector), Europe’s CSDDD will nonetheless hugely impact American businesses. The law “applies to large companies that are based in the European Union” as well as “non-EU companies that do above a certain amount of revenue in the European Union, so for example Apple or McDonald's,” Haskins explains. Further, these high-earning non-EU companies that fall under the jurisdiction of the CSDDD will be forced to adhere to its policies outside of the EU as well. “It's not enough for them to change their policies in the EU; they have to change it in America. They have to change it everywhere they do business; that's what the law says, and if they don't, then they can be fined 5% of their total worldwide revenue, so for a company like Apple, if you do the math, that's $19 billion for one violation,” says Haskins, who predicts that “no one's going to violate this law because they can't afford to.” If that wasn’t extreme enough, the law also applies to “almost all of the businesses that [companies under the CSDDD] work with in their supply chains, upstream and downstream, no matter where they're located or how much business those companies do in the EU.” Haskins points to Ford as an example. Ford is an American company that does business in the EU and produces enough revenue to fall under the jurisdiction of the CSDDD. Therefore, “All the businesses that [Ford does] business with in America are also doing these ESG scores,” he says, “so you could be a rubber manufacturer in Ohio that does no business in Europe, but you make rubber for Ford, so you also have to adhere to the EU rule, and Ford is going to be the one that imposes it on you through contractional insurances.” Naturally, Ford will comply because if the company refuses, “then Ford gets fined 5% of their total worldwide revenue.” “When you start playing out the ramifications of this, they’re enormous,” Haskins laments, adding that “through this [law], you can transform the entire country because you can transform hiring practices, business practices, the kinds of products that people sell and buy, the commitment to social justice goals,” etc. “What’s the end goal?” asks Allie. To hear Haskins' answer, watch the episode above. Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

“I wish that my son was killed by a 60-year-old white man.” Imagine saying those words as a father of a dead child. Covering up a racist murder simply because the victim is white. “I wish I had died instead of my son” or pretty much any other combination of words would be more understandable, more speakable — anything but this bizarre fixation on the skin color of the man responsible for his son’s death. And yet those were words uttered by Nathan Clark at a press conference on September 10. ‘Look what you’ve done to us’ A little context: Nathan’s 11-year-old son Aiden was killed and dozens more children were injured when a Haitian drove a minivan into a school bus in Springfield, Ohio, last August. Now that Haitian immigration to Springfield is a national issue, with lurid tales of domestic pets being caught and butchered for food, Nathan Clark wanted to set the record straight about the circumstances and meaning of his son’s death. I suppose he did that — but perhaps not in the way he thought he would. Here’s some of what Nathan Clark said: I wish that my son Aiden Clark was killed by a 60-year-old white man. I bet you never thought anyone would ever say something so blunt. But if that guy killed my 11-year-old son, the incessant group of hate-spewing people would leave us alone. The last thing that we need is to have the worst day of our lives violently and constantly shoved in our faces. But even that's not good enough for them. They take it one step further. They make it seem as though our wonderful Aiden appreciates your hate. That we should follow their hate. And look what you've done to us: We have to get up here and beg them to stop. Using Aiden as a political tool is, to say the least, reprehensible for any political purpose. And speaking of morally bankrupt, politicians Bernie Moreno, Chip Roy, JD Vance, and Donald Trump — they have spoken my son's name and used his death for political gain. This needs to stop now. They can vomit all the hate they want about illegal immigrants, the border crisis, and even untrue claims about fluffy pets being ravaged and eaten by community members. However, they are not allowed, nor have they ever been allowed, to mention Aiden Clark from Springfield, Ohio. Grief does terrible things to people. We all know this. I wouldn’t blame Nathan Clark if, just a year after his son’s tragic death, the wound is still gaping and raw. Who would? But the nature of the statement and its targets — Donald Trump, JD Vance, MAGA, “misinformation,” and “hate” — suggest deliberate crafting and calculation, not the kind of lashing out you’d expect from a father driven mad by pain and loss. It’s a totally politicized call for de-politicization. America’s peacemaker Maybe this is a glimpse into the abyss of the modern liberal soul, into the deep recesses where the ideal of absolute equality takes root. Equality at any price, even the life of your own child: Is that not commitment? What we sacrifice reveals the nature of what is truly most sacred to us. God showed Abraham that, and Cain learned his lesson the hard way. Maybe. But I think there’s something more to the story than that when you consider just how many parents and family members of dead white people — and it’s always white people — say stuff like this now. That extra something is fear — and political pressure. Nathan Clark may be a dyed-in-the-wool liberal, but it’s likely he received a visit from the Department of Justice’s Community Relations Service, which told him exactly what to say and how to say it. According to its own website, the CRS “serves as ‘America’s peacemaker’ for communities facing conflict based on actual or perceived race, color, national origin, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, or disability.” When a community faces such a conflict, the CRS springs into action, “providing facilitated dialogue, mediation, training, and consultation” to help communities “come together, develop solutions to the conflict, and enhance their capacity to independently prevent and resolve future conflict.” Throughout, the CRS aims to be “the neutral party.” Burying Donald Giusti But what does this bureaucratese mean in practice? It means that when a white person is the victim of a serious crime at the hands of a non-white person or persons, the CRS turns up and makes sure the victim and their loved ones don’t kick up a fuss and, most of all, don’t say anything inflammatory about the role of race in the crime. That’s exactly what happened when Donald Giusti was smashed over the head with a rock and stomped to death by a mob of Somalis in a Lewiston, Maine, park six years ago. The CRS website includes Lewiston as an example of a successful intervention. According to the CRS, “conflict [had] been on the rise between the immigrant population and the white community” for “several weeks” before Donald Giusti was killed. The city’s police chief then called in the CRS “to help ease racial tensions and strengthen community relations.” The mere existence of the CRS and the documented instances of its work tell us all we need to know about the profound anti-white bias of the American government today. Public statements by the victim’s family were essential to the “peacemaking” process. Donald Giusti’s uncle was wheeled out for the press, and so was his sister. Both said more or less the same thing. “We want to see the violence stop,” the uncle said. “We want to see things come to an end, we want people to be able to come to the park and be happy. Walk through the park and not be afraid.” The sister expressed her hope that her brother’s death would not be for nothing and that it would “give this community a voice to say something needs to give.” And what of the man held responsible for the killing? He was allowed to plead “no contest” to a reduced charge of criminal negligence and was sentenced to just nine months in prison. So this is what “easing racial tensions and strengthening community relations” really means to the CRS and the Justice Department: covering up a racist murder simply because the victim is white. I won’t say, “Imagine if the roles were reversed,” because I’m well past that point, and you probably are too. You know how different things would have been if it were a bunch of Italian-Americans beating a Somali man’s brains out in a park. Never ‘a race thing’ Donald Giusti isn’t the only one. Look at the terrible case of Jonathan Lewis, the schoolboy kicked to death last year by at least eight black teens in an alley behind their school. Lewis was killed over a pair of wireless headphones and a vape pen. But instead of calling for justice or expressing anger or any kind of recognizably human response, Jonathan Lewis Sr. issued a public statement denying that race was a factor in the killing. “This is a humanity thing beloved people of the United States. Not a race thing!” he wrote on a fundraising page for his son’s funeral. Or look at the case of Andy Probst, the former police chief who was deliberately run down and killed by two non-white teenagers on a joyride in a stolen car. Again, the same dismal script, this time read by the victim’s daughter on behalf of the whole family: We believe that Andy’s murder is a direct result of society’s decayed family values and the strong effects that social media has on our youth. We as a family in no way feel that Andy’s murder was based on race or profession, and was a random act of violence. We ask you to not politicize or use Andy’s murder to fuel political agendas or to create cultural wars. I can’t say for sure whether the CRS was involved in the cases of Andy Probst, Jonathan Lewis, and Aiden Clark, but there is every reason to believe so. The similarities are undeniable. To refuse the script The mere existence of the CRS and the documented instances of its work tell us all we need to know about the profound anti-white bias of the American government today. What kind of pressure does the CRS apply to people like Donald Giusti’s uncle and sister? Threats? Probably not direct threats. Threats don’t need to be explicit to be felt and understood. We know from the famous Milgram experiments that the mere presence of authority is enough to get people to act almost totally out of character, up to and including administering fatal electric shocks to complete strangers. A white lab coat is all it takes in the right setting. I’d also like to know what it would take for a family to go against the CRS. To refuse to read the script and instead tell America: “They’re trying to make us say things we don’t believe. It does matter that our loved one was killed by in an apparent racist attack. It matters, and it’s happening all the time.” What an act of bravery and patriotism that would be. I won’t hold my breath. Whether he was coached by the CRS or not, Nathan Clark didn’t speak out against the use of his son’s death for political gain. He did the opposite. He spoke out in favor of a different political vision from that of Donald Trump and the millions of ordinary Americans who support him and simply want their country back: a world where people are interchangeable, where whole towns and cities and even nations can be replaced, where the life of a child — of many children — is a fair trade in pursuit of a new America so long as the children are white. Nathan Clark spoke out in favor of an America that was once unspeakable but is fast becoming reality.

Researchers examining human remains in a 17th-century crypt in Milan found evidence of cocaine use, suggesting that Europeans consumed coca leaves nearly two centuries earlier than previously thought. The post New Evidence Suggests Europeans Began Using Cocaine As Early As The 17th Century appeared first on All That's Interesting.

Peter Doocy Asks KJP How Many More Times She's Going to Call Trump a 'Threat'