The cases of Daniel Penny and Luigi Mangione are not the same, and neither deserves to be equated to the other. Daniel Penny is a Marine who defended a subway car full of people from a violent unstable homeless man flailing around, screaming that he would kill everyone and didn’t care if he went to jail. Luigi Mangione, who appears to have gone through a complete mental breakdown after being laid off, after an unsuccessful back surgery following a surfing incident, and prolonged psychedelic use, allegedly murdered Brian Thompson, the CEO of United Healthcare, after writing an anti-capitalist manifesto of perceived wrongs. Daniel Penny was acquitted after being charged with homicide for restraining a violent man. The jury ruled that Penny did not attempt to ruthlessly murder some random black man as the prosecution claimed. He is a hero for defending those around him from immediate danger. Brian Thompson was murdered because one mentally unwell individual decided his position in a company marked him for death. His killer is no hero. The American revolution was a war fought AGAINST direct, observable actions of tyranny, FOR a list of well-defined, unalienable rights endowed by the Creator. The French revolution, and later Marxist and Socialist revolutions, were fought AGAINST any accused of perceived ills because of status, race, religion, wealth, education, i.e. the haves, for the “have nots”. In every one of these these mob-rule revolutions, the haves are always eventually defined as any person who has anything the lowest “have not” doesn’t. Daniel Penny’s case was one of the common defense in the pursuit of rights, whereas the murder of the United Healthcare CEO was a class Marxian “have” versus the “have not” style murder. They are not the same. The post Stop Comparing Daniel Penny and Luigi Mangione. They Are Not the Same. appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. A damning report from Department of Justice (DOJ) Inspector General Michael Horowitz has revealed that, in 2017, the Justice Department engaged in secret surveillance of lawmakers, congressional staff, and journalists. We obtained a copy of the report for you here. As we covered back in September in our When The Watchdogs are Watched report, the covert collection of records targeted a wide range of individuals. CNN reported that the DOJ obtained communications from prominent figures such as Reps. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Eric Swalwell (D-CA), along with Kash Patel, who served as a Republican staffer for the House Intelligence Committee at the time. The surveillance extended to 21 Democratic congressional staffers, 20 Republican staffers, two nonpartisan congressional staffers, and eight journalists from major outlets, including CNN, The Washington Post, and The New York Times. Patel has since been nominated by President-elect Donald Trump to lead the FBI. In the Inspector General’s findings, Horowitz expressed alarm over the potential consequences of these actions. He emphasized that pursuing such investigations so closely tied to classified leaks and subsequent media reporting could undermine the legislative branch’s ability to perform its constitutional duty of executive oversight. Horowitz stated that these actions could create “the appearance of inappropriate interference by the executive branch in legitimate oversight activity by the legislative branch,” thereby eroding trust in governmental accountability. Although Horowitz’s report did not conclude that political retaliation or partisan motives drove the surveillance, it highlighted procedural lapses and the need for greater safeguards. The Justice Department failed to disclose to lawmakers and staffers that nondisclosure orders (NDOs) were in place, preventing them from being notified that their communications were under scrutiny. At the time, DOJ policy did not mandate such disclosure, leaving room for potentially unchecked executive action. The Inspector General’s recommendations for reform were pointed and urgent. Among them, he advised: Requiring senior-level review—potentially by the Deputy Attorney General or Attorney General—before issuing compulsory processes in cases involving members of Congress. Ensuring that NDOs explicitly inform reviewing judges when records pertain to lawmakers or their staff. Considering exhaustion requirements before resorting to compulsory processes for congressional communications. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post DOJ Probe Exposes Secret Spying on Lawmakers, Journalists, and Kash Patel appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Over the weekend, large parts of Russia’s online world were deliberately cut off from the global internet, illustrating the government’s increasingly heavy-handed approach to controlling information flows and restricting digital freedoms. According to accounts gathered from several affected regions, including Chechnya, Dagestan, and Ingushetia, authorities intentionally severed connections to evaluate the resilience and readiness of their self-contained “sovereign internet” system. This maneuver left many residents facing a broad digital blackout that underscored ongoing efforts to consolidate state power over the country’s communications. The internet monitoring group NetBlocks further confirmed that disruptions in Dagestan persisted for around 24 hours. During the shutdown, numerous essential online tools were blocked. Users reported they were unable to access widely used platforms — such as YouTube, Google, WhatsApp, Telegram, and even some features of the Russian tech giant Yandex — showing that VPNs did not offer a reliable escape from the chokehold on connectivity. Local internet service providers, caught in the crossfire, expressed their inability to restore normal access. One operator in the North Caucasus region admitted it was aware of the frustrated public but could do nothing to reverse the imposed restrictions. Officials from Roskomnadzor, Russia’s internet and media regulator, have claimed the ultimate purpose of these trials is to ensure that Russian digital infrastructure can remain functional “to maintain the operation of key foreign and domestic services in the event of intentional external interference.” By testing in regions with long-standing tensions, Roskomnadzor appears poised to weaponize connectivity, prepared to cut off entire populations from critical messaging platforms like Telegram if future unrest unfolds. This is hardly an isolated event; Russia’s track record includes past disruptions of messaging apps during periods of protest and social discord. Moscow’s drive toward a self-sufficient internet, often called the Runet, has been in motion for years, championed as a system conforming strictly to Russian regulations and values, where everything else is censored. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Russia Tests “Sovereign” Internet, Threatens Foreign Hosting Providers appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. In Canada, TikTok is attempting to get the authorities to reverse the decision to shut down its business operations by going to court – but also by recommending itself as a proven and reliable ally in combating “harmful content” and “misinformation.” Canada last month moved to shut down TikTok’s operations, without banning the app itself. All this is happening ahead of federal elections amid the government’s efforts to control social media narratives, always citing fears of “misinformation” and “foreign interference” as the reasons. TikTok, owned by China’s ByteDance, was accused of – via its parent company – representing “specific national security risks” when the decision regarding its corporate presence was made in November; no details have been made public regarding those alleged risks, however. Now the TikTok Canada director of public policy and government affairs, Steve de Eyre, is telling the local press that the newly created circumstances are making it difficult for the company to work with election regulators and “civil society” to ensure election integrity – something Eyre said was previously successfully done. In 2021, he noted, TikTok initiated collaboration with Elections Canada (the agency that organizes elections and has the power to flag social media content) which included TikTok adding links to all election-related videos that directed users toward “verified information.” And the following year, TikTok was invested in monitoring its platform for “potentially violent” content, during the Freedom Convoy protests against Covid mandates. More recently, TikTok was also on its toes for “foreign interference and hateful content” related to Brampton clashes between Sikhs and Hindus. This approach, Eyre argues, is now jeopardized because TikTok employees are not present in Canada, who would be able to inform the platform’s decisions in terms of the political and cultural “context” in Canada. And the political context is that of the Trudeau government playing the election misinformation card indirectly and directly, to put pressure on social sites. Even though the decision regarding the company’s business operations has been described by Foreign Minister Melanie Joly as “a message to China” – it’s really a message to TikTok, since the app remains available, but has been “put on notice.” If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post TikTok Battles Canada’s Crackdown, Pitching Itself as a “Misinformation” Censorship Ally appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

Bone analysis has provided valuable insights into the diets and lives of Neolithic people that have otherwise remained somewhat mysterious.

George Orwell had it right. We’ve somehow allowed a mob of degenerates guilt trip an entire society into a dystopia that rejects all morals in the name of morality.  War is peace, ignorance is strength… Men are Women. “Affirming” the mentally ill is “life saving healthcare,” and with that, refusing to pay for someone’s “essential health care” is akin to murder. A cowardly thug murdering an innocent father in cold blood is therefore justified resistance. That’s who our leftist politicians, mainstream media and pop culture have celebrated for the past week. A wannabe vigilante jumping out of the dark to shoot a self-made CEO from an Iowa farm town was somehow presented as a win for the common man against the corporate empire. Except their Marxist hero, the identified suspect, turns out to be the product of privilege and money, cut from the same cloth as the Ivy League “revolutionaries” cheering him on. This episode of “Woke of the Weak” dissects a loser mentality behind history’s most genocidal movements and regimes.

For the second time in two different weeks, The View’s Sunny Hostin made comments that were at best indifferent and at worst permissive of extremists assassinating insurance company executives. This time, she opined about how many Americans didn’t trusting the healthcare system, how America was “built on violence,” and how many believe “violence is justified right now” against corporations. Following the rest of the cast who condemned the killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson and said violence wasn’t the way to change the healthcare industry, Hostin wasn’t as committed to the nonviolence. Without a full throated condemnation of what happened, she then proceeded to lay out a reasoning for why so many thought knocking off executives was the way to bring about reform. She even argued that violence was ingrained in the American system and many people were calling for it: Um. I mean, I agree with mostly everything that’s been said. I mean, we know that, you know, only about 31 percent of Americans trust our healthcare system. We have a terrible healthcare system…So, there are a lot of problems with it. But the notion that we aren’t a violent country, this country was built on violence. We're a very violent country. And it's just undeniable that that's the case. So, I'm not unfortunately, surprised that people are celebrating the use of violence. I'm not surprised that this young man thought that change could be accomplished through violence. One in four Americans say violence against government sometimes is justified, and today in 2024 one in ten Americans say violence is justified right now against corporations and the government. Hostin also made curious comments about her husband’s interactions with insurance companies. She said her husband, who’s a surgeon, “operates on someone even though they don't have insurance and then has to sue health insurance companies to get paid for the work that he's been trained his whole life to do.” Judging by what she said, it appeared as though her husband was trying to bill insurance companies for people who were not their customers.     Previously, Hostin touted the ghoulish takes cheering on the assassination. As for the rest of the cast, as mentioned above, they collectively condemned the killing. “Now, the vast majority of Americans want the healthcare industry fixed. But I got to tell you, murdering someone is not the way to do it,” moderator Whoopi Goldberg proclaimed. “I don't know if it's a lack of empathy or people are outraged by the healthcare system in this country. Doesn't justify killing anybody to me anyway. I think it's a very stupid idea, bad idea,” Joy Behar responded. “Voting good, murder bad. Let's get that straight.” Although, Behar later suggested it was part of the “American idea that only rich people can afford to get sick.” Alyssa Farah Griffin ripped the shooter by noting, “He’s not offering a solution. He had a two-page manifesto; there wasn't a single line as I read it that examined, ‘so what would you like to do? What would be better than the system that we live in?’” For her part, Sara Haines tore into the disgusting people who were showing “glee” over the assassination. “My heart is not allowing for this. Check in were your minister, check in with your parents, check in with someone. Because if you in any way feel this was the answer, you need to look at yourself,” she declared. She also called out the shooter for besmirching his family’s history of employing practical, beneficial solutions to societal problems: This guy had every privilege in the world. I've said this before. His grandfather was frustrated with things. He didn't like government bureaucracy; he was a bricklayer, and immigrant, and a had ten kids. And guess what he did. He created nursing homes. He didn't like the country club in their area -- he had money and wealth because they didn't treat him right – so he opened his own country club. This guy is riding on the back of that family and all they built. He could have gone in to a system and done something, and he's trying to be a revolutionary. This is a civilized country. We don't do this. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View December 11, 2024 11:03:21 a.m. Eastern (…) WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Now, the vast majority of Americans want the healthcare industry fixed. But I got to tell you, murdering someone is not the way to do it. So is this – I guess people are thinking of it as a lack of empathy over this murder. What does it say about where people's heads are at? JOY BEHAR: I don't know if it's a lack of empathy or people are outraged by the healthcare system in this country. Doesn't justify killing anybody to me anyway. I think it's a very stupid idea, bad idea, but, you know, when you read the -- I mean – ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: Murder is bad idea. SARA HAINES: Murder is bad. [Crosstalk] BEHAR: Murder is bad. Voting good, murder bad. Okay. Let's get that straight. And it doesn't seem like -- a lot of people go bankrupt. 500,000 people go bankrupt in this country every year because of health care issues. It doesn't seem like an American idea that only rich people can afford to get sick. And yet, it is an American idea. SARA HAINES: Yeah, but some people assign if you don't feel a little bit of glee that you're out of touch or you don't understand. And I'm sorry, but at the lowest low this is not the way I was raised. My heart is not allowing for this. Check in were your minister, check in with your parents, check in with someone. Because if you in any way feel this was the answer, you need to look at yourself and that's – This guy had every privilege in the world. I've said this before. His grandfather was frustrated with things. He didn't like government bureaucracy; he was a bricklayer, and immigrant, and a had ten kids. And guess what he did. He created nursing homes. He didn't like the country club in their area -- he had money and wealth because they didn't treat him right – so he opened his own country club. This guy is riding on the back of that family and all they built. He could have gone in to a system and done something, and he's trying to be a revolutionary. This is a civilized country. We don't do this. And by the way, this does not change things. For everyone that’s sitting there, they're going to put one more pawn in there. If you want to change it and I understand the outrage. There are people sitting in emergency rooms with one-year-olds, people that can't get beds for kids with disabilities. The list goes on and on. I am not out of touch with the reasons. This is never the answer. Who’s next? What elite is next? FARAH GRIFFIN: It's a microcosm of what’s wrong with a lot of our society and I think a lot of it is driven by the internet and the digital space which is this is a person, ‘he’s good-looking. Oh, no, we're so surprised. Good-looking people commit crimes.’ HAINES: Yeah, Ted Bundy. FARAH GRIFFIN: Yeah, exactly. He’s coming out in favor of a cause that I think, generally agree, the American healthcare system is not great. He’s not offering a solution. He had a two-page manifesto; there wasn't a single line as I read it that examined, ‘so what would you like to do? What would be better than the system that we live in?’ And then there's this desire to cheerlead and kind of create fan lore around this person rather than address – okay, the one takeaway – well, the two – this is wrong and now there are going to be kids who don't have a father on Christmas Day because the CEO was killed. But secondarily, that we all agree there may be a collective problem but what are we doing to try to fix it? And I'm so frustrated that the discourse seems to be more around celebrating him and excitement or anger over the system but not talking about solutions. And even -- and this is not – I want to be careful in how I say this. Bernie Sanders and Senator Elizabeth Warren put out statements decries the ills of the healthcare system, but they’re part of the system. I think that we need to hold those who are in places of power, who can make changes more accountable than to actually do something about it. [Crosstalk] BEHAR (speaking over Farah Griffin): Why go after two liberals? FARAH GRIFFIN: Cause they put out statements specifically on this. GOLDBERG (speaking over Behar and Farah Griffin): Well, hold on. Wait. Wait. Sunny. Sunny, answer. Wait. Hold on. Let sunny get in here. SUNNY HOSTIN: Um. I mean, I agree with mostly everything that’s been said. I mean, we know that, you know, only about 31 percent of Americans trust our healthcare system. We have a terrible healthcare system. And, you know, doctors suffer because of big corporations, as well. Doctors that want to do good like my husband, you know, operates on someone even though they don't have insurance and then has to sue health insurance companies to get paid for the work that he's been trained his whole life to do. So, there are a lot of problems with it. But the notion that we aren’t a violent country, this country was built on violence. We're a very violent country. And it's just undeniable that that's the case. So, I'm not unfortunately, surprised that people are celebrating the use of violence. I'm not surprised that this young man thought that change could be accomplished through violence. One in four Americans say violence against government sometimes is justified, and today in 2024 one in ten Americans say violence is justified right now against corporations and the government. HAINES: It’s scary. FARAH GRIFFIN: It’s very scary and it’s wrong. HOSTIN: That’s just the facts. HAINES: And even though I don't think he might have change something; I think he might have laid out a plan for a copycat. That’s what I see. (…)

A Florida state representative who was just re-elected as a Democrat has now switched her party affiliation to Republican.On Monday, state Rep. Susan Valdes took to X to announce the move. "Effective immediately, I will change my registration from a Democrat to Republican and will join the Republican Conference in the Florida House of Representatives," she said in a statement.'I know I won't agree with my fellow Republican House members on every issue, but I know that in their caucus, I will be welcomed and treated with respect.'In her statement, Valdes claimed she had identified as a Democrat "partly out of habit" since her family members consider themselves Democrats. She also indicated that Speaker Daniel Perez and other Republicans have a better "vision" for the future of Florida, especially those in her district, which covers the West Tampa area."Perez has laid out a vision for the House that focuses on empowering House members to work on real problems facing our communities. That's what I want to be a part of," Valdes said.She even suggested that Democrats are little more than naysayers: "I'm tired of being the party of protesting when I got into politics to be part of the party of progress."Elsewhere in her statement, she dropped hints that her reasons for ditching the Democratic Party may be personal. "I will not waste my final two years in the Florida Legislature being ignored in a Caucus whose leadership expects me to ignore the needs of my community.""I know I won't agree with my fellow Republican House members on every issue, but I know that in their caucus, I will be welcomed and treated with respect."What's more, just last week, Valdes campaigned to become the Hillsborough County Democratic Executive Committee chair but lost, according to the Tallahassee Democrat. She defeated Republican challenger Maura Cruz Lanz by five points in November.At least one of her Democrat colleagues in the state House is not sorry to see Valdes jump ship. "Rep. Valdes was elected by her constituents as a Democrat to fight for our shared values here in Tallahassee and has consistently and publicly shared that she feels the Republican Party does not adequately represent her constituents or her beliefs," House Democratic Leader Fentrice Driskell said in a statement."It is sad that she has elevated her own aspirations above the needs of her district."But Republicans, who now enjoy a staggering 86-34 majority over Democrats, are welcoming Valdes with open arms."Welcome to the Republican Party!" tweeted the X account for the national GOP."We all know Susan as a fierce advocate for her community, and a person of uncommon common sense. She will be a great asset to our Republican team," said a statement from Perez."Welcome to the GOP, Rep. Valdes! Congrats to Speaker @Daniel_PerezFL on the biggest Republican majority in the history of the Florida House!" added a tweet from the personal account of Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis.Valdes was first elected to the state House in 2018, which means she is now term-limited. She previously served on the Hillsborough County School Board.Her page on the Florida House government website already lists her as a Republican.H/T: the Daily MailLike Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Democrat Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office is pushing for Judge Juan Merchan to put President-elect Donald Trump's case on ice until after his presidency.Trump, who pleaded not guilty, was convicted by a New York City jury on all 34 counts of falsifying business records. His sentencing, which was originally slated for July, has been postponed multiple times.'A pathetic attempt to salvage the remains of an unconstitutional and politically motivated hoax.'Following Trump's presidential victory in November, Merchan agreed to allow the defense to file a motion to dismiss the case.Trump's lawyer, Todd Blanche, argued that the November election result was "a mandate that supersedes the political motivations of DANY's 'People,'" referring to Bragg. He further contended that moving forward with the case would be "uniquely destabilizing" for the country.On Tuesday, Bragg's office rejected Blanche's request to dismiss and argued that the case should be put on hold until the conclusion of Trump's presidency.The prosecution wrote, "President-elect immunity does not exist. And even after the inauguration, defendant's temporary immunity as the sitting President will still not justify the extreme remedy of discarding the jury's unanimous guilty verdict and wiping out the already-completed phases of this criminal proceeding.""No principle of immunity precludes further proceedings before defendant's inauguration. And even if judgment has not been entered at the time of defendant's inauguration, there is no legal barrier to deferring sentencing until after defendant's term of office concludes," the prosecution's filing continued.Bragg's office argued that issuing a stay in the case and waiting to sentence Trump in 2029 would exempt the president-elect "from any immediate obligations in this case during his time in office, while at the same time respecting the public interest in upholding the rule of law and preserving the meaningful aspects of the criminal process that have already taken place."Steven Chueng, Trump's spokesperson, told Fox News Digital on Tuesday that the prosecution's filing was "a pathetic attempt to salvage the remains of an unconstitutional and politically motivated hoax.""This lawless case should have never been brought, and the Constitution demands that it be immediately dismissed, as President Trump must be allowed to continue the presidential transition process and execute the vital duties of the presidency, unobstructed by the remains of this, or any other, witch hunt," Chueng continued. "The sooner these cases end, the sooner our country can unite behind President Trump for the betterment of all Americans."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A Republican congressman sounded the alarm about mysterious drones seen over New Jersey and laid out the case that they may have been launched from an Iranian "mothership."Republican Rep. Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey made the comments on Fox News while speaking to host Harris Faulkner on Wednesday. He said he gathered the information from sources as a member of the Transportation Committee and the Aviation subcommittee. 'Whether it is Iran, and I think it very possibly could be, they should be shot down.' "From very high sources, very qualified sources, very responsible sources, I'm gonna tell you the real deal," said Van Drew. "Iran launched a mothership probably about a month ago that contains these drones. That mothership is off the east coast of the United States of America. They've launched drones, [from] everything we can see or hear," he added. "I don't say this lightly."At least 11 drone sightings were made near the Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey, with some described as drone clusters. Some have estimated that the drones were as large as SUV vehicles. Videos on social media appeared to show the drone clusters in the night sky. "Van Drew said that the possibility of the drones being from the U.S. military has been ruled out and that if they are from some foreign country or the work of a very sophisticated amateur, the drones should be shot down," he continued. "Know that Iran made a deal with China to purchase drones, motherships, and technology in order to go forward," Van Drew explained. "These drones should be shot whether it was some crazy hobbyist that we can't imagine, or whether it is Iran, and I think it very possibly could be, they should be shot down. We are not getting the full deal."He added that the military is on alert over the incidents.Van Drew had previously compared the drone threat to the infamous Chinese spy ballon incident from 2023. "First, a Chinese spy balloon drifted across U.S. airspace for a week," he said on social media. "Now, unidentified drones are flying over New Jersey, avoiding radar detection. Gaps in our airspace are being exploited, and because of it, the safety of Americans is at risk." On Tuesday, Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri opined that the military was not being forthcoming about what the drones actually were. "If our government really doesn’t know what these giant drones are over New Jersey and our military bases, they’re even more incompetent than we thought. Time for them to level with us about what’s really going on," he wrote. Video of Van Drew's comments can be viewed on his YouTube account. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!