On his eponymous Saturday morning show, anti-gun MSNBC host Ali Velshi gave a commentary against the gun rights portion of the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 agenda. After taking the opportunity to spread the typical misinformation about guns in America, he brought on anti-gun activist Kris Brown of the Brady Campaign to further trash gun rights activists. Beginning his commentary, the MSNBC host warned against a Donald Trump presidency. A bit later, he fretted over Trump's proposal to allow teachers to be armed and cited a poll by Johns Hopkins claiming that only 23 percent of Americans support "civilians" having guns in schools: And, lastly, Trump's Agenda 47 calls for arming teachers with guns and, quote, "to support federal funding to hire trained gun owners as armed guards in our nation's schools," end quote. This despite a Johns Hopkins survey showing that less than a quarter -- only 23 percent of Americans -- support allowing civilians to carry guns on school grounds. But other polling specifically about training school staff to carry guns for security finds substantially more support for more use of guns for school security. A bit later, after bringing up conservative opposition to abortion, Velshi snidely suggested that Republicans only care about children until after they have been born: And with classrooms increasingly resembling maximum security prisons, consider this: Project 2025 refers to abortion acts as, quote, "the grotesque culture against the child in the womb," end quote, I'll respect -- I'll repeat that: "the grotesque culture against the child in the womb." It seems, though, once children are out of the womb, the GOP is practically content with having them fend for themselves in the face of unchecked gun violence. He concluded his commentary by incorrectly claiming that shootings are a "uniquely American" problem: "The extreme proposals outlined in Project 2025 and in Agenda 47 will take a sledgehammer to the already limited gun control measures we have, leaving us scrambling for ever more adequate defenses against the uniquely American public health crisis of gun violence." But in Mexico, for example, where it is difficult to purchase a gun legally, the homicide rate is three times what it is in the United States. After a commercial break, Velshi brought aboard Brown and called the NRA a "racket" as he cued up his liberal guest to trash the conservative group: The proposals in both Project 2025 and Agenda 47 are perfectly aligned with NRA goals, including efforts to overturn state bans on assault-style weapons. Talk to me about the role that the protection racket that is the NRA and the gun rights groups and the lobby are playing in shaping these blueprints. In her response, Brown accused the NRA of not caring about gun violence and of just being motivated by money: And the agenda there is very clear. It's to sell as many guns to as many people as possible and remove every public safety measure in place to allow that to happen. It's profit-seeking, and the NRA and these other gun rights extremist groups could care less that gun violence is the number one killer of our kids. She also took out of context a comment by Trump from January after a school shooting in Iowa occurred just days before the Iowa caucuses. Here's Brown: "And same with Donald Trump. Let's believe him when he says about school shootings, we should just 'get over it.' No one's getting over this -- no parent. All of us feel at risk, and the solutions before us are really simple." But Trump was talking about the need to focus on the upcoming election, not that nothing should be done about school shootings. Velshi then jumped in to misleadingly quote J.D. Vance calling school shootings a "fact of life" to make it sound like the GOP vice presidential candidate had recommended not doing anything about school shootings when, in fact, Vance advocated arming teachers because school shootings are a "fact of life." Velshi: "J.D. Vance said this week that it's 'a fact of life.'" Transcript follows: MSNBC's Velshi September 7, 2024 10:44 a.m. Eastern ALI VELSHI: And today our deep dive into Project 2025 is going to focus on the blueprint's proposals on gun policy. Now, if the gun rights lobby has its way, Wednesday's tragic shooting in Georgia will be reduced to yet another statistic dressed up in empty thoughts and prayers. And if Donald Trump returns to office, the GOP's unholy alliance with the corporate gun lobby could be cemented into federal law. (...) And, lastly, Trump's Agenda 47 calls for arming teachers with guns and, quote, "to support federal funding to hire trained gun owners as armed guards in our nation's schools," end quote. This despite a Johns Hopkins survey showing that less than a quarter -- only 23 percent of Americans -- support allowing civilians to carry guns on school grounds. The proposal respects the -- reflects the GOP's long-standing policy of shifting responsibility for public safety from the gun industry to school children and school administrators. In the absence of political will, school children are left scrambling for bullet-proof backpacks and classroom panic buttons along other band-aid solutions. And with classrooms increasingly resembling maximum security prisons, consider this: Project 2025 refers to abortion acts as, quote, "the grotesque culture against the child in the womb," end quote, I'll respect -- I'll repeat that: "the grotesque culture against the child in the womb." It seems, though, once children are out of the womb, the GOP is practically content with having them fend for themselves in the face of unchecked gun violence. The extreme proposals outlined in Project 2025 and in Agenda 47 will take a sledgehammer to the already limited gun control measures we have, leaving us scrambling for ever more adequate defenses against the uniquely American public health crisis of gun violence. (...) 10:55 a.m. VELSHI: The proposals in both Project 2025 and Agenda 47 are perfectly aligned with NRA goals, including efforts to overturn state bans on assault-style weapons. Talk to me about the role that the protection racket that is the NRA and the gun rights groups and the lobby are playing in shaping these blueprints. KRIS BROWN, BRADY CAMPAIGN: Thanks for having me. And, indeed, you're exactly right. Look, it's not just in these documents -- both Project 2025 and Agenda 47. As you noted in the segment before, it is a top priority of the National Rifle Association and extremist gun rights groups to pass what they label "concealed carry reciprocity." Basically what that would do is undo all of the permitting systems that exist in states across this country. That's what it would do. And the agenda there is very clear. It's to sell as many guns to as many people as possible and remove every public safety measure in place to allow that to happen. It's profit-seeking, and the NRA and these other gun rights extremist groups could care less that gun violence is the number one killer of our kids. And same with Donald Trump. Let's believe him when he says about school shootings, we should just "get over it." No one's getting over this -- no parent. All of us feel at risk, and the solutions before us are really simple. VELSHI: J.D. Vance said this week that it's "a fact of life."

Great Britain’s Conservative Party went down to a huge defeat this summer, with Labour’s Keir Starmer taking the reins as prime minister in July. The New York Times Sunday Magazine of August 29 celebrated with a 4,000-plus-word story by Mark Landler, “The Conservative Crack-Up.” The equally blunt online headline: “How the Tories Lost Britain.” A gleeful, vengeful tone permeated the piece, reflecting Landler’s five years of hostile reporting on the U.K. Conservative Party while serving as the paper’s London bureau chief. Over that time he managed to say virtually nothing positive about a party that nevertheless somehow managed to stay in office for 14 years. He opened with an interview with Conservative politician Liz Truss, who had a “calamitous, 49-day stint as prime minister,” in which Truss criticized mass migration and the aggressive push for transgender rights for the state of the country that day. Landler didn’t appreciate her criticism of the left: Never mind that Truss was ultimately undone by her own policies: an ill-judged foray into Ronald Reagan-style, trickle-down tax cuts that frightened the financial markets, sent the British pound into a tailspin and provoked the kinds of warnings about financial instability from the International Monetary Fund normally issued to rogue regimes in Latin America. After references to “Tory sleaze” and “the self-sabotaging referendum on Brexit,” Landler blamed Brexit, again, for It “pulling [Conservative] leaders to the right and forcing successive governments into ever-more-extreme policies.” That lingering disappointment acted as an accelerant for the anti-immigrant riots that convulsed Britain for several days this summer. Four weeks after voters threw out the government, gangs of far-right thugs stormed mosques and torched the hotels used to house asylum seekers. The spark was a brutal knife attack on a dance studio by a 17-year-old Welsh-born man whose parents immigrated from Rwanda; he was charged with killing three children and injuring 10 others. A nytimes.com search indicates no Times writer has ever used the phrase “far-left thugs.” By contrast, “far-right thugs” popped up 6 times. It's a partisan paper. Then Landler really hurt Conservative feelings by comparing the party to Trumpism. In their embrace of radicalism, the Conservatives bear an obvious resemblance to their American cousins in the Republican Party. Both have ridden the whirlwind of populism. Both have discarded decades of orthodoxy on core economic and social issues…. Landler quoted author Samuel Earle on “The strange dissonance between the Conservative Party’s ability to win elections and its destructive record in government stands as one of the defining riddles of British politics.” The reporter didn’t mention Earle wrote something called “Tory Nation -- The Dark Legacy of the World's Most Successful Political Party.” But surely he’s an objective source on the “Tory” party (aka the Conservative Party), right? Never has that riddle been more mystifying than in the eight years since the Brexit referendum. The party cycled through no fewer than five prime ministers, a spectacle of corruption, hubris, folly and misrule. One particularly galling sentence talked of “The media ecosystem that surrounds and props up the Conservatives -- from The Daily Telegraph and other pro-Tory papers to the noisy right-wing TV news channel, GB News -- keeps hammering the message that the party’s problem is that it is not sufficiently right-wing.” As if the left-wing (and tax-funded) BBC, the left-wing Guardian, and of course the New York Times didn’t help tear down the Tories. Landler and his UK team, including reporters Benjamin Mueller and Stephen Castle, have traditionally been particularly feverish in their attacks on Brexit and former Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who made “get Brexit done” a rallying cry. The paper blamed the Brexit push for, among other things, shorter life spans; racist and Islamophobic attacks, even “Talibanization.” NewsBusters recounted the Times’ long failure to fight Brexit and Johnson after he won re-election in lopsided fashion in 2019: “Three-Year New York Times Smear Against Boris, Brexit Flopped on Election Day.”

Host Jon Karl opened today’s broadcast of ABC This Week with a 16-minute interview of former Congresswoman Liz Cheney, with which to facilitate her (and former Vice President Dick Cheney’s) announced decision to vote for a Democrat for President- Vice President Kamala Harris. And Karl sought to bolster that endorsement with a proven falsehood. WATCH as Jon Karl repeats the lie that “Kamala Harris has moderated” on a whole range of policy issues: ABC THIS WEEK 9/8/24 9:05 AM JON KARL: You've made it abundantly clear that you have had policy disagreements with Harris. You still have policy disagreements with Harris, but she has moderated her positions on a whole range of issues from where she was just, you know, just a few years ago. Did those moderations and the efforts to present kind of a moderate face at the Democratic Convention- did that make the decision to endorse her easier?  Karl makes this assertion but offers no evidence to back it up. Did Harris hold a press conference wherein she explained her policy shifts? Was this mystery press conference covered anywhere in the media, or did it get lost somewhere in the Brat Summer of Joy? This moderation is manufactured out of whole cloth for the purpose of giving the Cheneys the thinnest of policy fig leaves in light of their decision to endorse Harris. But it was exposed as fake the last time Karl tried to trot this talking point out, just two weeks ago (click “expand” for transcript): On #ThisWeek, @JonKarl unaware of Harris’s stance against private health insurance. When @SenTomCotton notes it, Karl: “What do you mean taking away health insurance? What are talking about?” Then: “That is not her position now....clearly making an effort to move to the middle.” pic.twitter.com/dLk3LEnuCp — Brent Baker ?? ?? (@BrentHBaker) August 25, 2024 ABC THIS WEEK 8/25/24 9:24 AM TOM COTTON: And President Trump is going to draw a sharp contrast with Kamala Harris, who has supported things like decriminalizing illegal immigration or giving taxpayer-funded health insurance to illegal aliens or taking away health insurance on the job for 170 million Americans, banning gas cars, confiscating firearms. These are all positions… JON KARL: What do you mean taking away health insurance? What are you talking about? COTTON: She said when she ran for president that she wants to eliminate private health insurance on the job for 170 million Americans, Jon. KARL: Yeah, I mean, th- that is not her position now. She no longer… COTTON: How do you know that's not her position? How do you know that's not her position? KARL: I mean, she- she said she no longer supports medicare for all. COTTON: She has not said that. She has not said that. Maybe anonymous aides on a Friday night have said that, but the last thing that she said on most of these topics… KARL: This was not a radical convention. She- she- she- as you heard me go through with Bernie Sanders, she is not taking the positions of the far left of her party. She's clearly making an effort to move to the middle. COTTON: I did hear what you said to Senator Sanders, and I thought it was clear that he is very disappointed that she's taking these efforts not to change her positions, but to hide her positions, Jon. The American people are totally justified to conclude that Kamala Harris is a dangerous San Francisco liberal, based on what she campaigned on the last time she ran for president and what this administration has done the last four years. Again, you would have thought watching the Democratic convention last week, that the Democrats are not in office, that they're not in power, that they're campaigning against an incumbent Republican, when in reality she's been part of the failures of the Biden-Harris administration for four years. And when she campaigned for president in her own right, she did, in fact, promise things like decriminalizing illegal immigration, taking away health insurance on the job. KARL: I mean- but that's a position she's clearly changed on… COTTON: No, she hasn’t. KARL: …and she said she has changed- Yes. Yes, she has. COTTON: No. She has not. She has not said that.  She did not say that. But the Regime Media, desperate to manufacture a permission structure for Republicans to defect en masse to Harris, have also manufactured a “moderation” that simply does not exist.

WTF: Springfield, Ohio Residents Say Haitian Immigrants Are Capturing and Eating Wild Animals

UH OH: Guess Which Age Group Identifies LEAST With Democrats (And It Doesn't Bode Well for the Left)

Pure Fire: Gov. Sarah Sanders Hits the Big Issue With the Cheneys, Other 'Republicans' Endorsing Harris

The history of beverages reveals a fascinating evolution from our earliest days when humans primarily consumed water. Despite the modern variety of drinks, milk and beer stand out as two of the oldest beverages, each offering insights into early human culture and survival strategies. Ancient People Drank Milk Even Though They Were All Lactose Intolerant Sip Like a Sumerian: Ancient Beer Recipe Recreated from Millennia-Old Cuneiform Tablets Milk, believed to be at least 6,000 years old, was a crucial source of nutrition, especially in less sunny climates where vitamin D was scarce. Evidence from ancient skeletons, including the presence of milk proteins in dental plaque, suggests that early humans relied on milk for its nutritional benefits, potentially extending their lifespans. Read moreSection: NewsHuman OriginsScienceVideosRead Later 

Angelica Maria Francisco, an illegal immigrant who resided in Russellville, Alabama, has agreed to plead guilty to charges of stealing an American's identity and using it to vote in elections as well as obtain a U.S. passport for trips to Guatemala, the DOJ announced.

Warren Buffett did not become a billionaire by being stupid.  According to Forbes, Buffett is worth more than 144 billion dollars, and that makes him one of the wealthiest men in the entire world. …