A coalition of congressional Republicans urged the World Health Organization on Monday to “disband” the group it put in charge of developing guidelines on transgenderism, according to a letter first shared with The Daily Wire. Led by doctors Rep. Rich McCormick (R-GA) and Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS), the lawmakers sent a letter to WHO Director-General Tedros Ghebreyesus demanding that he dissolve the organization’s Guideline Development Group (GDG) on transgenderism because of its ties to leftist activist groups. The lawmakers say that the group has bypassed and ignored scientific evidence showing the harms of transgender procedures in favor of ideology. “Any guidelines that affect the health and well-being of individuals must be rooted in rigorous scientific evidence and must be free from conflicts of interest,” McCormick told The Daily Wire. “We cannot allow the voices of powerful activists to dictate medical practices that should prioritize patient safety and health outcomes.” The guidelines group was announced in December 2023 with the purpose of developing a framework “on the health of trans and gender diverse people” and promoting “health policies that support gender-inclusive care, and legal recognition of self-determined gender identity.” In addition to Marshall and McCormick, the letter was signed by 27 House Republicans. Marshall told The Daily Wire that the group was another example of why the United States should cut ties with WHO.  “The World Health Organization has abandoned its mission to cater to radical globalist activists; it is past time to stop its funding and cut our losses,”the Republican senator said. “The WHO’s ‘gender identity’ cult and its embrace of irreversible mutilation surgeries and psychologically harmful chemical therapies are just one of the many reasons the U.S. needs to walk away from this globalist organization.” The letter says that the process surrounding the guidelines has “been shrouded in secrecy, irregularities, and profound conflicts of interest.” “Incomprehensibly, the Group bypasses evidence reviews on the safety, effectiveness, risks and costs of treating gender dysphoria with medical interventions, including cross-sex drugs,” the letter says. “Instead, it moves directly to consider how countries should provide such interventions and impose the highly controversial, sex-denying framework of ‘gender identity,’ including through legal ‘self-identification.’” Specifically, the lawmakers take issue with the fact that multiple of the members of the guidance group are members of the far-Left World Professional Association for Transgender Healthcare (WPATH), an organization that removed age limit restrictions for its guidelines for transgender procedures at the behest of the Biden administration. The letter noted that Walter Bouman and Gail Knudson, members of the WHO guidance group and WPATH, signed onto a letter to pressure researchers not to publish results that would “negatively affect the provision of transgender health care in the broadest sense.” The letter said that other members of the GDG have been part of a group called Global Action for Trans Equality, a group that promotes transgender procedures. “GATE exists to promote, not assess gender transition interventions. It cannot possibly serve as an unbiased participant,” the Republicans wrote. The lawmakers said that the GDG’s group so far looked more like “a global marketing campaign rather than an honest assessment of the medical evidence.” “The proposed GDG guidelines mirror the fraudulent WPATH process: like WPATH, the GDG has opted not to review the evidence to determine whether hormones should be widely available. Instead, it will only focus on how to best promote their wide availability,” the lawmakers wrote. CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE The Republicans said that WHO policies that allow sex to be determined by “self-identification” pose a risk to women and children. “Policies that treat sex as a matter of ‘self-identification’ endanger women and children,” the letter says. “Most Americans recognize this fact, and strongly oppose ‘self-identified’ biological males accessing private spaces and competitions reserved for females.” The letter says that the whole group should be scrapped, and any future guidelines grounded in a careful review of scientific evidence. “This vulnerable population deserves evidence-based care, not a shameless promotion of medical experiments tainted by ideology and industry interests,” the lawmakers wrote. “We urge you to disband this Guideline Development Group, investigate the disreputable process that led to its formation, and discard its proposed guidelines.” WHO has long come under fire and been accused of politically motivated action from its handling of COVID and close ties to China.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said on Tuesday that he had a “good call” with President-elect Donald Trump after Trump threatened to impose tariffs on goods from Canada if it did not crack down on the flow of drugs and illegal immigration coming into the United States. “I had a good call with Donald Trump last night, again. We obviously talked about laying out the facts, talking about how the intense and effective connections between our two countries flow back and forth. We talked about some of the challenges that we can work on together. It was a good call,” Trudeau told reporters on Tuesday. PM Trudeau tells reporters re: phone call with incoming U.S. President Donald Trump after threat to impose 25% tariffs on products from Canada & Mexico: "It was a good call. This is something that we can do, laying out the facts, moving forward in constructive ways." #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/GeJJK0Xrnx — CPAC (@CPAC_TV) November 26, 2024 “This is something that we can do. Laying out the facts, moving forward in constructive ways. This is a relationship that we know takes a certain amount of working on, and that’s what we’ll do. One of the really important things is that we be all pulling together on this. The ‘Team Canada’ approach is what works,” Trudeau added before noting that he spoke with other Canadian leaders and planned a First Ministers’ meeting this week to address the situation. CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE In a Monday evening post to his social media platform, Truth Social, Trump indicated that he would begin his second term with a flurry of executive orders that would include tariffs on Canada, as well as Mexico, calling out the U.S. neighbors and raising concerns about people “bringing” crime and drugs across the borders. “On January 20th, as one of my many first Executive Orders, I will sign all necessary documents to charge Mexico and Canada a 25% Tariff on ALL products coming into the United States, and its ridiculous Open Borders,” he said. Trump added: “This Tariff will remain in effect until such time as Drugs, in particular Fentanyl, and all Illegal Aliens stop this Invasion of our Country! Both Mexico and Canada have the absolute right and power to easily solve this long simmering problem. We hereby demand that they use this power, and until such time that they do, it is time for them to pay a very big price!” With a more combative statement, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum also responded to Trump, warning that tariffs the United States implements on Mexico could be followed by similar penalties on U.S. goods. CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE “President Trump, migration and drug consumption in the United States cannot be addressed through threats or tariffs. What is needed is cooperation and mutual understanding to tackle these significant challenges,” she wrote. “For every tariff, there will be a response in kind, until we put at risk our shared enterprises.” In a second post to Truth Social on Monday, Trump took aim at China, promising an “additional 10% Tariff, above any additional Tariffs, on all of their many products” that he said would remain in place until Beijing cracks down on drugs flowing to the U.S. He once again singled out fentanyl.

It’s tempting to get jaded when you spend any amount of time covering politics, or commenting on politics. Very often, you’ll weigh in on a particular issue. You’ll spend a lot of time developing arguments and presenting them. You might break some news. You might call your congressman or write a comment on social media. And then nothing will happen. The people in power might pretend to listen to you, but in the end, you’ll be ignored. That happens time and time again. That’s why, when the reverse happens – when we actually succeed in bringing about meaningful and substantial change – we should celebrate it. We should call attention to it and then we should carefully consider what to do next. We should think about how to capitalize on what we’ve achieved. That’s the case right now, as a fight we’ve been waging for several years is about to produce what could very well be one of the most important Supreme Court rulings of our generation. One of the most important moments in this fight came in the Fall of 2022, when I posted the results of our investigation into the transgender clinic at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee. My team and I uncovered evidence that Vanderbilt viewed so-called “gender-affirming procedures” as a money-making operation, by their own admission. They said it on tape. We also proved that Vanderbilt had boasted about giving irreversible hormone drugs to children as young as 13, and about performing double mastectomies on adolescent girls — all in the name of “gender-affirming care.” These were procedures that, for the most part, people didn’t even realize were happening. Children were being sterilized and butchered, and no one had any idea. That’s why, immediately after we reported on Vanderbilt’s practices, millions of people living in Tennessee — and around the country — called for these “gender clinics” to be shut down. We held our “Rally to End Child Mutilation,” and many of you showed up. That was the rally when several Tennessee lawmakers announced plans to end these practices. WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show And that’s exactly what happened. Within months, in response to our reporting, a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers in the Tennessee legislature passed a law called “SB 1.” This law made it a crime to administer puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones to children for the purposes of affirming the child’s alleged “gender identity.” Surgeries were also banned. Just a year earlier, that kind of swift, decisive action from state lawmakers would’ve been unthinkable. Gender ideology was a topic that very few politicians wanted to get involved in — even in Tennessee’s legislature. At the time, circa early 2022, it was easy for many conservatives to accept the Left’s framing of the issue, and move on. But some conservatives didn’t move on. Instead, they decided to defend the truth, basic biology, and the well-being of Americans — particularly children. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), for example, asked Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson to define the word “woman” during her confirmation hearing. This should’ve been the single easiest question ever asked in the history of confirmation hearings. But infamously, Jackson couldn’t answer it. Then my film, “What is a Woman?,” was released, and once again, self-described gender experts couldn’t answer the question. It became one of the most-watched documentaries of all-time, in part because people were eager to see this deranged ideology being exposed. In other words, the culture shifted. But it didn’t shift by accident. It shifted because we made it shift and this company —and more importantly the people who subscribe to us and support our work — were a major part of that. Matt Walsh/What is a Woman? Now, two years after I posted my investigation into Vanderbilt, the Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments in a case called “The United States v. Skrmetti.” The arguments will take place next Wednesday. In the end, this case could very well turn out to be a Dobbs-style earthquake in the fight to protect children in this country. The name “Skrmetti” in the case refers to Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti. He’ll be arguing in defense of Tennessee’s ban on child mutilation, or SB 1. In his brief before the Supreme Court, Skrmetti repeatedly cites The Daily Wire’s reporting on Vanderbilt as a catalyst for SB1. He says voters reacted to our reporting — and that it would be unconstitutional to override what voters want. He’ll be arguing against the Biden DOJ, along with trans activists at the ACLU. They’re taking the state of Tennessee to court over SB 1. Their argument is that it’s unconstitutional to ban child sex-changes. They’re claiming it violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Essentially, they’re alleging that doctors and parents have a constitutional right to castrate, sterilize, and mutilate gender-confused kids. Before I get into the specifics of “U.S. v. Skrmetti,” and the ramifications of it, I need to point out that bringing this case will be one of the last, official acts of the Biden administration. They’re the ones who filed an appeal to the Supreme Court, demanding that they hear this case after the Sixth Circuit upheld SB 1. Stefani Reynolds/Bloomberg via Getty Images To put this in context: After suffering a crushing defeat in the last election — an election in which an overwhelming majority of Americans made it clear that they reject gender ideology, especially as it relates to children — the Biden administration is pressing on. They are continuing to argue in court for child castration and sterilization, even after it’s abundantly clear that these procedures are barbaric, and very few Americans actually support them. This is what the Biden administration wants its legacy to be. You can’t afford groceries, violent crime is rampant and the world is falling apart – but at least you can castrate your child. At the Supreme Court on Wednesday, the Biden administration will be assisted by the ACLU’s lead transgender attorney, who uses the name “Chase Strangio.” When I say that Chase Strangio is the ACLU’s lead transgender attorney, I mean that in two senses. First, Chase Strangio herself identifies as transgender. She’s very clearly a woman trying to pass as a man, and failing. And secondly, Chase Strangio is supposedly one of the ACLU’s foremost experts in the field of trans-related law. She’s currently slated to deliver oral arguments next Wednesday at the Supreme Court. And that’s not because Strangio is a compelling orator, or anything remotely like that. Quite the opposite, in fact. For a preview of what these oral arguments will look like, here’s Strangio explaining her view of Tennessee’s bill banning child castration. This is what the nine justices of the Supreme Court can expect to hear next week. And if you’ve never felt pity for Supreme Court justices before, then after you hear this, you’re guaranteed to feel at least some. Let’s listen: New TransLash Podcast with @imarajones is out now! ? Chase Strangio, @aclu_nationwide attorney and the first openly trans lawyer to argue before the Supreme Court, breaks down U.S. v. Skrmetti. This December 4 case could redefine trans rights in the U.S. pic.twitter.com/ZpWci6ldwW — translashmedia (@translashmedia) November 17, 2024 This is what we can expect for around 15 to 20 minutes during oral arguments next Wednesday. A woman pretending to be a man will pretend, with maximum indignation, that it’s an “overreach” by the federal government to protect children from castration. Of course, these are people who would love to see the federal government set the price of groceries, or raise your taxes in order to pay the living expenses of illegal aliens, or throw the leading presidential candidate in prison. But when there’s the possibility that the government might intervene to stop child butchery, suddenly they pretend to be small-government liberals. They ask, “how could the government possibly interfere in what private citizens want to do?” – as if that doesn’t happen all the time; as if that’s not what all laws are. Well, in this case, it’s pretty simple, actually. “Chase Strangio” answered her own question in that video you just saw. The idea that we should honor the wishes of a two-year-old girl who “asserts herself” and “recognizes herself” as a boy is, to every reasonable person, completely insane. It insults the intelligence of anyone who’s ever been around a two-year-old, much less raised one. It’s not uncommon for two-year-olds to “assert themselves” as superheroes, or dinosaurs, or household pets. That’s particularly true if an adult has planted that idea in their head, in one way or another. That doesn’t mean we should tell these children that they’re actually dinosaurs, and then pump their bodies full of dinosaur-affirming hormones. This shouldn’t need to be explained. It’s common sense. And as you heard, Strangio’s argument at the Supreme Court will be that an alleged “consensus” among “experts” should override your common sense, along with the democratic will of the people. This is an argument that, in his brief that was submitted to the Supreme Court, Skrmetti demolishes for about a dozen reasons. For one thing – even if you agree for some reason that experts are entitled to some degree of deference, which they shouldn’t be – there’s still a problem. And that problem is that we have clear evidence that various “experts” in this area have been compromised for political reasons. CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE For example, in his filings with the Supreme Court, Skrmetti cites evidence that Rachel Levine, the trans-identifying HHS Assistant Secretary for Health, pressured the organization that sets the guidelines for so-called “trans healthcare,” in order to lift all age limits for these gender procedures. I’ve previously outlined the sordid and disturbing history of this organization, which is called WPATH. These are quacks who have no place in medicine whatsoever. No hospital should be paying any attention to them. In internal documents, WPATH admits it has no idea what it’s doing, as Michael Shellenberger documented in the leaked WPATH files. But on top of that, WPATH is an explicitly political enterprise. In communications with WPATH, Levine stated that WPATH’s initial “failure” to lift all age restrictions on “gender affirming” procedures for children was, “proving a barrier to optimal policy progress.” So WPATH relented. As The New York Times reports: The draft guidelines, released in late 2021, recommended lowering the age minimums to 14 for hormonal treatments, 15 for mastectomies, 16 for breast augmentation or facial surgeries, and 17 for genital surgeries or hysterectomies. The proposed age limits were eliminated in the final guidelines outlining standards of care. So WPATH did what the Biden administration wanted, which is to tell hospitals that child butchery is acceptable at any age. And that decision matters a great deal, because many major hospitals right now rely on WPATH’s guidelines. In their brief, Tennessee went on to provide other evidence that WPATH is compromised. At one point, for instance, WPATH commissioned Johns Hopkins to produce some evidence backing their guidelines. But they gave up on that after the Johns Hopkins’ review found, “little to no evidence about children and adolescents” benefitting from these alleged treatments.” That highlights another problem for the Biden administration and the ACLU, which is that it’s not even true that there’s a consensus among experts on this topic. In fact, there’s nothing even approaching a consensus. Health officials in the UK, Norway, Finland and Sweden have all concluded that gender interventions on children “pose significant risks with unproven benefits.” Various groups in this country, including the American College of Pediatricians, have come to the same conclusion. MATT WALSH’S ‘AM I RACIST?’ NOW STREAMING ON DAILYWIRE+ Another problem here – one that Tennessee is going to bring up at the Supreme Court – is that there’s recently been an unexplained and very drastic change in the patient population of alleged transgender individuals. In just the past few years, the percentage of children identifying as transgender has doubled, from zero-point-seven percent to one-point-four percent. Meanwhile, the percentage of trans-identifying adults has remained constant, at about zero-point-five percent of the total population. By some estimates, Skrmetti notes, the number of children presenting with gender dysphoria has tripled in just four years, from 2017 to 2021. And these children are now overwhelmingly adolescent girls, when historically, trans-identifying patients were typically adolescent and adult males. So we’re dealing with a patient population that’s rapidly changing, in ways that can only be explained by a social contagion. And rationally, the solution to a social contagion isn’t to pump children full of sterilizing hormones. The treatment is to take a step back and address the social contagion. And one way to do that is to immediately ban the butchery and sterilization of children, which is what voters in Tennessee — and many other states — have decided to do. The fundamental legal issue in this case is whether these bans on child butchery somehow violate the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. To make that argument, the ACLU is saying that Tennessee’s ban discriminates against certain patients on the basis of their sex. This is an argument that makes very little sense because Tennessee’s bill doesn’t classify anyone based on sex, or any other “protected characteristic.” Instead, the law sets age-based restrictions on procedures like castration, sterilization and surgery. And we ban certain medical procedures based on age all the time. That was the legal basis that the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals used in order to uphold Tennessee’s law last year. They concluded there was no sex-based discrimination at all, and therefore no need to apply any “heightened” standard of review to the law. That ruling was a devastating blow to the trans agenda, as I explained at the time. It was a complete takedown of the idea that SB1 violates the Equal Protection Clause. As the Sixth Circuit explained, the point of the ban is to protect every child equally — whether they’re boys or girls. If the Supreme Court denies this challenge by the ACLU and the DOJ on the same grounds, they would give the legal all-clear to Congress to do something it should’ve done a long time ago, which is to pass a national ban on so-called “gender transitions” for children. This is not a state’s rights issue. It’s a human rights issue. Children have the right to be protected from castration and mutilation. As best I can tell, Republicans haven’t introduced any kind of legislation that would ban these procedures on children at a nationwide level. Last year, before he became the speaker of the House, Mike Johnson and other Republicans floated the possibility of a nationwide ban. But they haven’t followed through. It’s time to change that, before any more children are harmed. A national ban on this barbarism would prevent gross human rights abuses like the one I described yesterday, in the case of Jeff Younger. But even aside from all of that — this is a winning political issue. There’s no reason not to do it. Exit polls that were commissioned by Democrats showed that, among swing voters who voted for Trump and ultimately decided the election, Kamala Harris’ ridiculous stance on gender ideology was the single most important issue in their minds. People are tired of this. So there’s no reason we shouldn’t press the issue. Force Democrats to come out and make the argument for castrating 12 year old boys. See how that works for them. The truth is that no Democrat — not one — wants this fight. Other than activists like Chase Strangio and the last remnants of the Biden administration, they all know how crazy it makes them sound to oppose a ban like this. And if they don’t want the fight, that’s all the more reason to give it to them. With this case before the Supreme Court — and conservative control of the entire federal government — we’re closer than we’ve ever been to dealing a crushing and total defeat against the gender cult. All Republicans need to do now is to follow in Tennessee’s footsteps at the national level. Tell all of these activist “doctors” and butchers that they will never again sterilize or castrate another child. Banish this insanity from the country so decisively and so thoroughly that it never returns. That’s what voters, in both parties, are asking for. It’s time Republicans gave it to them.

The liberal cohosts of ABC’s “The View” struggled to keep it together after special prosecutor Jack Smith filed to drop his ongoing cases against President-elect Donald Trump — and Judge Tanya Chutkan signed off on one of his requests. Cohost Joy Behar addressed the issue during Tuesday’s broadcast of the midday talk show, where she argued that the end of the lawfare proved that “karma” against Trump was non-existent. “After all that time and money, are we gonna get a rebate?” cohost Whoopi Goldberg asked of the now-wasted efforts to go after Trump. “We’re not getting any money back on that? Okay, well, what do you think of that?” “It kind of shows that there’s no such thing as karma, doesn’t it?” Behar asked. “It’s like the Easter Bunny and affordable housing, it doesn’t exist. I mean, I feel like — eventually, I think we will get him out. But it’s going to take a while and let’s hope there’s not too much damage that he does.” CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE Behar did not elaborate on what she meant when she said someone would “get him out,” but instead went on to jab at the American people for not listening to Vice President Kamala Harris when she promised to help people afford houses. WATCH: Behar demands Republicans "step up" to oppose Trump's agenda despite the public's mandate to him.Specifically, she hopes that Republicans step up to stop Trump from allowing dengue fever to sweep across the country. pic.twitter.com/FSrIn729VK — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) November 26, 2024 Behar then argued that it would be up to Republicans in Congress — many of whom won their seats on their promise to help Trump implement his agenda — to “step up” and help Democrats stop Trump from implementing his agenda. “I also think even though everybody’s been talking about how awful these picks are for the Cabinet, I feel like some of the Republicans in Congress are going to have to step up,” Behar continued. “Especially when you have somebody like Robert Kennedy Jr. — you sent me a thing the other day that said that Dengue Fever is on the rise, ok? I don’t think these Republicans want to get Dengue Fever. I don’t think that they want to get COVID. I don’t think that they want their kids to not get the polio shot.” “Maybe they will step up because it will affect them,” she said. Kennedy Jr., whose platform as an independent presidential candidate was Make America Healthy Again, has long said that he does not oppose vaccines on principle — he simply opposes vaccines that have not been through thorough and rigorous testing and does not believe that they should be mandated.

Vice President Kamala Harris held a livestream to thank her supporters and grassroots volunteers, but their comments indicate that she left them feeling even more defeated and despondent than they were before they joined the call. Harris held a joint event with her running mate Minnesota Governor Tim Walz today, telling her supporters that she is “proud of the race we ran,” and that “we still have a lot to fight for.” The Harris voters on the call, however, found themself underwhelmed, deflated, and in some cases, upset by the failed candidate’s remarks. Kamala Harris and Tim Walz just called together all their supporters for a Zoom call. It’s 16 minutes that you won’t get back, but here you go: pic.twitter.com/k5ha94MPol — Brent Scher (@BrentScher) November 26, 2024 “Feeling even more defeated,” one supporter on the call said as Harris’ speech came to a close. “That was such a waste, why did they even call this?” another added. “Trump’s about to be a dictator. And our voices won’t matter,” another Harris supporter said after her speech concluded. I’m currently watching a livestream where Kamala Harris is set to thank her supporters. Meanwhile they’re in shambles in the comment section, calling for a recount and for someone to “take down” Donald Trump. ? pic.twitter.com/iF5AsTfADq — Spencer Lindquist ?? (@SpencerLndqst) November 26, 2024 “You could have saved my hope and sent a thank you text. Geez, you people beg me for my time, my money, my hope,” one of the most scathing comments read. “I am gobsmacked at the thoughtlessness, but I shouldn’t be so naive.” The purpose of Harris’ speech, which did not include a fundraising pitch and recycled much of the same message from Democrat’s concession speech, was not readily apparent to many of her supporters. CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE Harris vaguely stated that their movement was not over, but did not provide her supporters with any potential ways they could help or issue any calls to action, instead thanking her supporters who donated and “called in favors.” “You called in favors, you said, ‘Hey, I showed up at your softball game, now I need you to show up at the campaign office,'” Harris said at one point during her speech. The announcement of Harris’ speech, which lasted just ten minutes, apparently got certain supporters’ hopes up, however. One commenter suggested that the failed candidate was using coded language and that Trump would actually be prevented from taking office somehow and that Harris had a trick up her sleeve that she could not yet reveal. “‘Outcome of this election is not what we wanted’ – notice she didn’t say ‘we lost’ – WE GET IT –  you can’t show your hand. That felon is going down.” “Kamala I absolutely still see you taking office on 1/20,” one comment read, while another said in all caps, “WE CAN’T HAVE ANOTHER 4 YEARS OF TRUMP!!! TAKE HIM DOWN NOW!!!!!” Numerous other Harris supporters called for a recount in the swing states, and some accused Trump of cheating with the help of Elon Musk.

''A really important choice to make'

'Got boot fucked to the head three times'

'The power of populism at this uniquely American moment is golden'