Journalist and attorney Megyn Kelly weighed in this week on the sexual assault accusation swirling around Trump Defense Secretary nominee Pete Hegseth, saying the accusation “smells” and highlighting how police decided not to prosecute. A police report concerning the allegation against Hegseth, a decorated combat veteran and Fox News host, was released on Wednesday in response to a public records request. An unnamed woman claims Hegseth sexually assaulted her in a hotel room back in 2017. Hegseth said that the encounter was consensual and police decided against any further action. “The Monterey Police did not bring charges,” Kelly said, noting that the accuser’s husband and children were apparently asleep down the hall in the hotel. “Pete said that he had got swept up in some woman’s guilt trip over the fact that she chose to sleep with ‘Pete Hegseth, big Fox News star,’ while her husband was asleep down the lane there in the hotel, and she didn’t want to tell him the truth.” “The cops chose not to prosecute,” Kelly continued. “If they had found date rape drug in her system — she said she had a rape exam the next morning — they 100% would have prosecuted him.” “So, to me, that one smells,” Kelly said. “And it smells bad.” MATT WALSH’S ‘AM I RACIST?’ NOW STREAMING ON DAILYWIRE+ The police report says that Hegseth told authorities that he repeatedly sought the consent of the woman and made sure she was “comfortable with what was going on.” Video footage from the hotel shows the pair leaving a hotel bar with their arms locked together. Hegseth’s attorney confirmed that his client paid the woman an undisclosed amount of money and had a confidentiality agreement out of fear that the woman would try to ruin Hegseth’s career, despite the host maintaining that the encounter was consensual. “This police report confirms what I’ve said all along, that the incident was fully investigated, and police found the allegations to be false, which is why no charges were filed,” Timothy Parlatore, an attorney for Hegseth, said on Wednesday. Karoline Leavitt, a spokeswoman for Trump’s transition team, similarly said that “police found the allegations to be false.” She also called Hegseth “a highly-respected Combat Veteran who will honorably serve our country when he is confirmed as the next Secretary of Defense, just like he honorably served our country on the battlefield in uniform,” according to CNN. WATCH: Related: Pete Hegseth Could Bring An End To DEI In The Military As Defense Sec, Expert Says

The FBI referred Colorado Springs Mayor Yemi Mobolade for prosecution for making false statements related to a hate crime hoax intended to boost his candidacy, but the Department of Justice refused to pursue it for racial and political reasons, an FBI official told The Daily Wire. On Nov. 12 the Acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Colorado announced that three of Mobolade’s supporters had been charged with writing the n-word on one of his campaign signs, erecting a burning cross in front of it, and sending video of the spectacle to the news media to turn out the black vote for Mobolade, an African immigrant. Mobolade, a left-wing candidate, went on to defeat a white Republican in a closely fought election in the conservative-leaning city. Communications obtained by investigators showed that the now-mayor was in close contact with the lead suspect, Derrick Bernard, before the incident, on the day of, and afterward. The FBI interviewed Mobolade twice to determine his knowledge of the hoax, and Mobolade explicitly and strenuously denied contact with Bernard, the official said. The official said there were dozens of messages between Bernard and the now-mayor. The official also said Mobolade was scrolling through his phone as a memory aide during the interview, but that “he was literally skipping over text messages,” not realizing that the bureau had already obtained them elsewhere. Bernard is a career criminal who was sentenced to 32 months in prison in 2018, allegedly attempted to kill two police officers, and has since been convicted of an unrelated murder of a rapper who disrespected him. As a result of Mobolade’s conduct in the interviews, the FBI referred the now-mayor to the Department of Justice to face charges for making false statements to federal investigators, the official said. But the Justice Department refused. “The initial response from the Department of Justice was ‘we can’t indict the first black mayor of Colorado Springs,’” the official said, adding “In my experience if anyone had been in that position they would have been charged with lying to a federal agent.” Instead, the Justice Department arranged for Mobolade to do a third interview. “During that interview, most of his answers consisted of ‘I do not recall.’ This was contrary to his interview answers from the previous two interviews where he denied involvement very strongly,” the official said. The DOJ then told the FBI it would not charge him with false statements. The would-be hate crime occurred in 2023 between an April 4 general election and a May runoff election that was scheduled because the general election was so close. Earlier this month, arrest warrants were issued against the three suspects, and on November 12, the case was unsealed and made public. Acting U.S. Attorney for Colorado Matt Kirsch put out a press release that day that misrepresented the candidate’s role. It said Bernard sent a message “to the other defendants” that said he was “mobilizing my squad” for “black ops.” But that message, according to the actual indictment, was sent to the now-mayor, not to Blackcloud and West. The message also notified Mobolade that “I spoke with some of my friends in other places and theirs [sic] a plot amidst.” When The Daily Wire asked the U.S. Attorney’s Office for Colorado for comment on the allegation that it rejected an FBI criminal referral for false statements and included a false statement in its press release, a spokesman said “we have no comment” and stealth-edited the press release to strike the phrase “to the other defendants.” Yet Mobolade seemed to expect even more from the Justice Department. On November 13, The Daily Wire emailed the mayor’s spokespeople asking about his communications with Bernard. That day, he personally called the Justice Department to request that it put out a second press release saying he was not a subject in the hoax hate crime investigation, the official said. The Justice Department seemed open to doing so, and consulted the FBI about it. But the FBI was taken aback by the request, because the mayor was, in fact, on investigators’ radar, the official said. Additionally, such a statement would come just as the other defendants had a reason to provide information about any involvement by Mobolade as part of plea deals, and an unusual and premature exoneration from the DOJ could derail that, the official said. The indictment relates several other interactions raising questions about whether Mobolade knew about Bernard’s hoax either before or after. Early in the morning on April 23, 2023, the trio allegedly staged the hate crime and emailed photographs to media outlets from an anonymous email address. The email used the supposed hate crime to turn out black voters. That night, Bernard texted Mobolade, “I guarantee the finish,” referring to winning the election, the indictment says. Three days later, on April 26, Mobolade and Bernard spoke on the phone for five minutes, the indictment says. Law enforcement mounted an intensive investigation to get to the bottom of an apparent white supremacist hate crime. But as the NAACP pressed for a full-scale investigation into the incident, Mobolade’s campaign seemed to hope for the opposite, saying it was probably a hoax and asking not to give it “any oxygen.” Mobolade has not explained what led him to believe it was a hoax. Local media covered the incident as Bernard intended, and Mobolade won the May 16 election with 58% in what local news called a “stunning turn of events.” That day, Bernard allegedly texted the candidate saying, “we got you through it all brother.” He added, “I have the info you requested before. Another time though, we’ll handle business.” Bernard texted Blackcloud a link to city job openings and implied that he anticipated a favor from Mobolade, saying, “I want favors quicker than later.” Bernard, Blackcloud, and West are charged with using interstate commerce to make a threat and convey false information, but not with a hate crime or election interference. Mobolade did not return a request for comment from The Daily Wire with specific questions. He previously sent a statement saying, “My knowledge and interaction with Bernard was as a local media personality, and I was not aware at the time that he was suspected of this crime. I appreciate local and federal law enforcement’s work in pursuing justice and sending a message that we will not tolerate such reprehensible behavior.”

A father, grandfather, and Michigan pastor died from his injuries after he was struck by a vehicle driven by an illegal immigrant earlier this month, and now his family is speaking out about the “senseless” killing. Stephen Singleton, 72, was on one of his routine morning walks in Rochester Hills, Michigan, on November 3 when he was hit while crossing the street, ABC 7 reported. According to investigators, Singleton was wearing a reflective vest and was using the marked crosswalk when he was hit. Authorities do not believe speed or alcohol played a role in the deadly crash. One witness told ABC 7 that the driver ran a red light before hitting Singleton. The Oakland County Sheriff’s Office said the driver of the vehicle is an illegal immigrant from Colombia. Michigan state law allows non-citizens to drive in the state as long as they have a foreign driver’s license that “is printed in English or accompanied with an English translation.” According to Singleton’s family, the illegal immigrant suspect was released from custody after the crash. “I had to sit and watch my husband of 53 years die in front of me and then to know that the person who did this is walking around is very difficult to deal with,” Singleton’s wife, Teri, said, according to Fox 2. “He’s dead and they’re walking around. That’s bothering me,” Teri added. ? Oakland County, MI: Earlier this month, Stephen Singleton, a 72-year-old Detroit-area pastor, was struck and killed crossing the street on a crosswalk while wearing a reflective vest. From @wxyzdetroit: "The…Sheriff's Office says the driver is a citizen of Colombia who was… pic.twitter.com/TIaEdOB1Bp — Illegal Alien Crimes (@ImmigrantCrimes) November 21, 2024 The Oakland County Sheriff’s Office did not respond to a Daily Wire request for comment. Customs and Border Protection said that the suspect crossed into the U.S. illegally before being released into the country pending a future court date. Singleton’s family said the 72-year-old Michigan man was a dedicated servant and a former medic. He also volunteered his service at Ground Zero after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. MATT WALSH’S ‘AM I RACIST?’ NOW STREAMING ON DAILYWIRE+ “I started tearing because I couldn’t find survivors,” Singleton said during a 2022 interview about looking for survivors after the 9/11 attacks. “We would find people who were perished, but we couldn’t find survivors.” Singleton’s daughter Ruth told ABC 7, “One day, I wake up and just know he’s gone for such a simple and senseless thing. I just don’t understand.” “He was a loving person who cared about everybody,” said Teri. “I mean, the whole neighborhood, everybody in our community has come to my door. They didn’t even see the name on the report, but they knew him because of his habits.”

Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-SD), who was recently elected as the next Republican Senate leader, slammed Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) this week for admitting that she would get rid of the filibuster if Democrats controlled the White House and Congress but not if Republicans had control. “Am I championing getting rid of the filibuster now when the Senate has the trifecta? No,” said Jayapal, the chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, during a press conference on Monday. “But had we had the trifecta, I would have been, because we have to show that government can deliver,” Jayapal added. Thune noted in a speech on the Senate floor that Jayapal said the quiet part out loud: “In other words, one rule for Democrats, and one rule for everybody else. Democrats should be able to do whatever they want; Republicans, not so much.” He said that the filibuster must be preserved because it “encourages compromise and helps ensure that all Americans, not just those whose party is in the majority, have a voice in legislation.” “If there’s one thing we’ve learned over the last few years, it’s that Democrats firmly believe that the only legitimate government is a Democrat government,” he said. Thune highlighted how Democrats have a campaign to undermine the legitimacy of the Supreme Court because they do not like the rulings from the conservative justices. “This court sometimes issues decisions Democrats don’t like, and therefore, in their view, the court is somehow illegitimate,” he said, later adding: “Democrats’ apparent belief that it’s the Democrat Party and the Democrat Party only that should be calling the shots in Washington betrays some of that same disdain for voters.” He said that the filibuster would be safe under Republican governance. WATCH:

A federal judge paused the Justice Department’s case against seven pro-life Christians awaiting sentencing over a peaceful protest at an abortion facility in Michigan as President Joe Biden prepares to leave office.  Judge Matthew Leitman ordered Tuesday that the FACE Act and felony conspiracy case against the pro-life activists be paused until after President-elect Donald Trump takes office. The pro-lifers, including 89-year-old communist concentration camp survivor Eva Edl, face up to 10 years for their conviction on conspiracy charges in September.  Sentencing had not yet been scheduled due to several pending motions from the defense to dismiss the convictions that Leitman has not yet ruled on. These motions will further be delayed due to the judge’s latest order.  “As further discussed on the record, the Court will conduct another status conference during the week of March 24, 2025, to receive a report from the Government trial team as to whether there has been any change in the Government’s position with respect to the continuation of this case and/or with respect to the positions expected to be advanced by the Defendants in their post-trial motions,” Leitman, an Obama appointee, wrote in a court order viewed by The Daily Wire.  Leitman’s order comes as there is anticipation that president-elect Donald Trump may quickly move to pardon the pro-lifers who have been imprisoned under Biden. Back in June, Trump promised to review the cases of “every political prisoner,” including people imprisoned over the FACE Act. The judge said that he would schedule an earlier conference on the case if the Justice Department was notified earlier of changes in handling the case.  Alongside Edl, those facing sentencing are Chester Gallagher, Heather Idoni, Joel Curry, Justin Phillips, Cal Zastrow, his daughter Eva Zastrow. They were found to have violated the FACE Act and conspiracy against rights over a peaceful protest at the Northland Family Planning Clinic.  Leitman’s order followed a status conference on the case on Monday in Detroit. On Wednesday, he ordered lawyers for the defendants to appear for the status hearing on March 25.  Steve Crampton, a lawyer from the Thomas More Society involved with the case, told The Daily Wire that Leitman decided to stay the proceedings during a status conference on Monday “in light of the election results and the likelihood that a new Department of Justice would alter its policies concerning prosecution of these FACE cases and in particular the use of the Conspiracy Against Rights statute against these defendants.” MATT WALSH’S ‘AM I RACIST?’ NOW STREAMING ON DAILYWIRE+ Crampton told The Daily Wire that Leitman was concerned it would be a waste of taxpayer money to keep paying court appointed attorneys because the “motions that may become moot depending on the new DOJ policies.” Crampton added that he told the judge that he and others were working on preparing formal petitions for pardons for the activists, as Trump has previously indicated he would look into doing if elected.  “I think the judge was correct in his thinking about the DOJ perhaps reversing course here and ordering a stay of the proceedings,” Crampton said. “There is a new sheriff in town, and these prosecutions were always more about the politics of protecting the abortion industry than they were about serious violations of the law.” Multiple pro-lifers across the country are currently incarcerated on FACE Act-related charges brought by Biden’s Justice Department.  During a Faith and Freedom Coalition conference in June, Trump talked about taking action on the first day of his term to help 75-year-old Paulette Harlow, who is serving a two-year prison sentence for the FACE Act. “Paulette is one of many peaceful pro-lifers who Joe Biden has rounded up, sometimes with SWAT teams, and thrown them in jail,” Trump said. “Many people are in jail over this. … We’re going to get that taken care of immediately — [on the] first day.” He added that he will “rapidly review the cases of every political prisoner who’s unjustly victimized by the Biden regime, including Paulette, so we can get them out of the gulags and back to their families where they belong.”

The other day we talked about some of the encouraging signs that Republicans in Congress are going to be a lot more responsive to their voters this time around. Unlike what we saw following the 2016 election, it doesn’t look like Republican lawmakers are deathly terrified of the Left anymore. They’re not worried about being called “bigots” or “transphobes” — at least not nearly to the same extent they were during Donald Trump’s first term. It’s still early, obviously, but the preliminary indications are good. And these indications keep getting better and better. On Wednesday we saw yet another sign that Republicans in Congress are actually going to start doing what their voters want. And in particular, it’s a sign they’re going to follow through with the Trump administration’s legislative agenda, which involves dismantling DEI policies at every level of government and throughout the country. The House Oversight Committee met yesterday to mark-up a bill called the Dismantle DEI Act of 2024. This is a bill that was co-sponsored by JD Vance and Michael Cloud, a congressman from Texas. The bill would undo every single one of Joe Biden’s many executive orders on DEI — including his executive orders mandating DEI in every federal agency, as well as his executive order establishing a “Chief Diversity Officers Executive Council” to coordinate affirmative action throughout the government. Even more importantly, the bill would also ban federal contracts from going to any company with a DEI policy. In terms of concrete steps, the bill would force every single government agency to shut down their DEI office and fire everyone in it. And those employees can’t be reassigned throughout the government, either. They have to pack their bags and find another job. Everyone remaining in the federal government, meanwhile, will be barred from ever discriminating against anyone — or “in favor of anyone” — on the basis of race, sex, national origin, and so on. For Democrats, this bill is obviously a major threat. Democrats went all-in on identity politics a long time ago, and now their entire party is defined by it. They have entire caucuses in Congress that are segregated by skin color, ethnicity, sexual orientations, and so on. As we saw during the campaign, Kamala Harris’ supporters voluntarily segregated themselves into “White Dudes for Harris,” “Black Women for Harris,” and a million other subgroups. Democrats have calculated that racial animosity and racial guilt can be leveraged for political gain — and up until the most recent election, it looked like they might be right. WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show But now it doesn’t look that way anymore. The momentum has shifted decisively against this kind of flagrant race hustling. All of the emotion and moral panic from 2020 is long gone. People are thinking clearly again. Now Democrats actually have to provide coherent, well-reasoned arguments in favor of the DEI policies they’ve been supporting for so long. And, as yesterday’s mark-up hearing in the House of Representatives demonstrates, Democrats are completely and comically incapable of doing so. I’ll start with the opening remarks by Jasmine Crockett (D-TX), who represents Texas in Congress (and specifically the Dallas area). I’ll get to other lawmakers’ opening statements as well, because a lot of them are worth talking about. But Jasmine Crockett’s comments stand apart. They are, without a doubt, some of the most ridiculous, untrue, and unhinged arguments you will find in support of DEI — which is really saying something. And they suggest very strongly that DEI is about to be completely eradicated in the federal government. With defenders like this, DEI doesn’t need critics, honestly. It helps that Crockett has the IQ of a baby squirrel. Here’s how her statement began. She starts by touting her own extensive credentials, and then launches into a really astonishing monologue. Watch: You might think that makes no sense. You might think it’s strange that a congresswoman is comparing “diverse” human beings to low-quality food items. You might even think that it’s the single most strained, irrelevant analogy you’ve ever heard. But you’ve got to ask yourself: Did you major in business at Rhodes College? Because, in case you didn’t hear, Jasmine Crockett did major in business at Rhodes College. So it’s pretty safe to say she knows what she’s talking about. You don’t just invest in vanilla wafers. You’ve got to add chocolate cake and Twinkies to your portfolio, too. And DEI is just like that, apparently. Now, admittedly, I didn’t go to Rhodes College. I didn’t major in business. I didn’t even go to college at all. So maybe there’s something a simpleton like myself isn’t grasping about the finer points of Jasmine Crockett’s argument here. But I can say, pretty authoritatively, that the point of a “diverse portfolio” is not to include supposedly “underrepresented” and “marginalized” stocks, for the sake of it. You don’t go to a broker and say, “Hey, I’d like to add some shares of Boeing, because there’s a lot of anti-Boeing bigotry out there and we need to rectify that.” You don’t buy shares in Spirit Airlines because no one else wants them. That kind of strategy would very quickly drive you to bankruptcy. The point of a “diverse portfolio” is to pick a variety of quality stocks, with enough redundancy that you’re not dependent on any one stock in case things go wrong. You don’t go out of your way to pick bad stocks in order to give them more “representation.” The point of DEI, on the other hand, is to elevate incompetent people and punish more deserving individuals, solely on the basis of characteristics that are irrelevant. But to be fair, I did interrupt Jasmine Crockett’s monologue. Let’s see what other insights she has for us: Crockett says she didn’t “ask” to be here, which is true. Really nobody “asked” to be in America. I certainly didn’t. Like Jasmine Crockett, I was fortunate enough to be born in America, which is a country that’s apparently so bigoted, so oppressive and so evil that it made Jasmine Crockett — one of the dumbest women in the entire world — into a member of Congress. But I guess she’s talking about her “ancestors” and what they chose to do. She wants to know which “white men” were ever enslaved. In order to think that’s a compelling point, you’d have to overlook the Moors’ conquest of Spain (and the enslavement of Christians there), the Barbary pirates’ enslavement of more than a million Europeans from the 16th to the 19th centuries, the Roman conquest of modern-day France, and so on. A lot of the descendants of those white slaves are probably in this country, too. But Jasmine Crockett never advocates on their behalf in any of these hearings. She pretends they don’t exist, actually. To be fair, her knowledge of world history extends as far back as nine seconds ago. Just kidding of course. She also doesn’t know anything about what happened in the world nine seconds ago. But again, I’m interrupting. Let’s continue: So now Jasmine Crockett tells us she’s Googled the word “oppression,” which apparently means “prolonged cruel or unjust treatment.” And she says that this can’t possibly apply to white people, for some reason. She never really explains why white people can’t suffer “unjust treatment,” even though they suffer unjust treatment every day. That’s the whole reason this bill is being proposed. She then launches into that infamous McKinsey study that supposedly shows that DEI somehow makes companies more money. This is a study that never made any sense, because there’s no reason that picking less-qualified candidates would make a business more profitable. But McKinsey kept on repeating this claim — in 2015, 2018, 2020, and 2023. They keep producing this same study, showing that DEI is supposedly a smart financial move for companies. Then, earlier this year, a group of researchers at “Econ Journal Watch” looked into McKinsey’s claims. They tried to re-run McKinsey’s methodology and they couldn’t replicate the results. The researchers concluded: “McKinsey’s studies neither conceptually nor empirically support the argument that large US public firms can expect on average to deliver improved financial performance if they increase the racial/ethnic diversity of their executives.” The researchers found that, “better firm financial performance causes firms to diversify the racial/ethnic composition of their executives, not the reverse.” In other words, when firms have a ton of money to spend, they throw it at useless DEI programs. That’s what McKinsey’s data actually showed. It doesn’t show that DEI makes companies money; it shows that companies with a lot of extra money spend their cash on DEI. This is the “data” that, according to Jasmine Crockett, justifies the use of DEI in the federal government. It is completely and totally baseless. MATT WALSH’S ‘AM I RACIST?’ NOW STREAMING ON DAILYWIRE+ You’d think a business major and lawyer like Jasmine Crockett would know that. But maybe we shouldn’t be surprised. After all, this is the same Jasmine Crockett who recently touted her “honorary degree” as a serious credential. Watch: No, the fact you’re a moron makes you unqualified. That’s the entire point of the bill. People are tired of entitled, low-IQ bureaucrats drawing taxpayer-funded salaries to work useless jobs. Americans want their government to start being productive, instead of wasting resources. They also want to end overt racial discrimination. That is, overwhelmingly, where most voters stand on this issue. At least one Democrat appeared to understand this. So he took a different approach. Here’s Congressman Jared Moskowitz of Florida arguing that the bill is a bad idea — not because DEI is good, but because it’s supposedly wrong to fire any federal government bureaucrat, for any reason. If you want to close the DEI offices, he says, then you have to re-hire these same employees in another government job. Watch:   Watching this, it’s pretty clear that Democrats believe that we work for the bureaucrats in the federal government. We are their servants. According to Jared Moskowitz, every single federal government employee has the “right” and “privilege” to a job. Even when they’re fired, we have to find them a new job in the federal government, like it’s an adult daycare or something. This is how Democrats plan to keep DEI embedded in the federal government. They want to just shuffle these useless bureaucrats around because, supposedly, they can’t be fired. If that’s how the civil service laws are currently written, then we obviously need to change those laws. You can’t run a government if you’re obligated to employ professional DEI leeches. That’s not sustainable.No company on the planet works like this. When a private business fires someone for being useless, they don’t have to find them a job in the mailroom or something. This is obscene. Besides, firing bureaucrats is a lot of fun. We should do it at any possible opportunity.  And to be clear, Jared Moskowitz’s argument is the best one I could find. This is the best Democrats could offer. The rest of their statements were like this one, from Congresswoman Summer Lee of Pennsylvania. Watch: Well, actually, that’s exactly what DEI does. It’s a “magical pass” that allows people like Kentaji Brown Jackson to serve on the Supreme Court, even though she can’t define the word “woman.” It’s a magical pass that allows Kamala Harris to run for president and serve as vice president, even though no one in the country likes her. It’s a magical pass that allows Claudine Gay to become president of Harvard after writing four papers, most of which were plagiarized. And now, finally, that magical pass is being revoked. There was something else that Summer Lee said in that clip that was interesting, in the sense that it was even dumber than the things she usually says. She claimed that it’s Republican “conjecture” to say that “remedying past discrimination” can possibly involve discrimination. But I seem to remember, as a renowned DEI expert myself, that a man named Henry Rogers (a.k.a. Ibram X. Kendi) once said, “The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination.” Apparently Henry Rogers never said that. Apparently that’s “Republican conjecture.” In reality, according to Summer Lee, anti-white discrimination isn’t actually discrimination at all. We’re now in the phase of DEI’s death spiral where the proponents of DEI are pretending they never said the things they’ve been saying for years. It’s astonishing to watch. Or maybe she’s escalating the rhetoric. Maybe she’s saying white people are so awful that, no matter what you do to them, it can’t possibly constitute “discrimination.” If that’s the case, then presumably you can do whatever you want to white people. Maybe that’s the vision Democrats are outlining in Congress right now. There’s one more moment that stands out from this sordid excuse for a hearing. It involves Congresswoman Shontel Brown of Ohio, who really thinks she has a “gotcha” moment. Meanwhile no one around her has any idea what the hell she’s talking about. Watch: So, she begins with a straw man argument. She says Republicans believe racism isn’t real and then says, “Aha! If racism isn’t real, then reverse racism can’t be real, so this whole bill is unnecessary.” Apparently she thinks that’s just going to shut the whole bill down. But there’s just silence, before she’s informed that nothing she said made any sense. Put aside the fact that “reverse racism” is a redundant expression, and how unbelievably uncomfortable this whole moment was. Instead, imagine — if you can — how much this congresswoman must have rehearsed this moment. Imagine the level of self-confidence she must have, despite the fact she should obviously have no self-confidence whatsoever. It’s inspirational, in a way. If there’s anything encouraging in this whole debacle, it’s that Republicans are finally making a serious effort to get these leeches out of the federal government. That’s what the Dismantle DEI Act will do. After watching most of this hearing, it’s pretty clear that Democrats have no logical argument for opposing it. All that’s left to do is pass it into law and terminate as many of these unqualified bureaucrats as possible. To borrow an expression from the great wordsmith Jasmine Crockett, we don’t need vanilla wafers, chocolate cake and Twinkies in the government. We need smart and capable people. And very soon, based on how this hearing went, there’s a real chance we might finally get them.

Feeling stuck in finding gratitude this season? Discover how a fresh look at Psalm 103 can renew your heart and inspire true thankfulness.

Fifteen patients were identified in one state between Nov. 2 and Nov. 10, the FSIS learned