Louisiana is home to a rich tapestry of folklore, where stories of mysterious creatures that “go bump in the night” are as much a part of the culture as the music and food. Among the state’s most famous cryptids are the Rougarou, a werewolf-like figure rooted in Cajun legend, and the Honey Island Swamp Monster, a creature said to roam the murky wetlands of St. Tammany Parish. In a recent episode of the History Channel’s series The Proof Is Out There (Season 4, Episode 16), video footage of an alleged Honey Island Swamp Monster takes center stage. The footage leaves little middle ground: This is either video of someone in a suit, or this is video of an actual Sasquatch in the wild. The Honey Island Swamp Monster is a legendary cryptid said to inhabit the dense, isolated wetlands of Louisiana’s Honey Island Swamp. First gaining public attention in the early 1960s, the creature has become a prominent part of local folklore. Witnesses describe it as a bipedal creature, standing about seven feet tall, with matted grayish hair, glowing yellow eyes, and webbed feet—an attribute that sets it apart from other Bigfoot-like creatures. The legend began with Harlan Ford, a retired air traffic controller, and his friend Billy Mills. While exploring the swamp, the pair claimed to have encountered the creature. Ford later reported finding massive, mysterious footprints, which he documented with photographs. Skeptics, however, suggest more mundane explanations—such as misidentified wildlife (like black bears) or outright hoaxes. The post Alleged Honey Island Swamp Monster Captured on Video appeared first on Anomalien.com.

The opportunity to encounter exotic phenomena makes life thrilling. In contrast, the boring routine is to meet the mundane. We crave for the exotic over the mundane. Because of this tendency, Richard Feynman warned: “We must be careful not to believe things simply because we want them to be true. No one can fool you as easily as you can fool yourself.” This pearl of wisdom cautions not to get carried away with the interpretation of Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP). Yesterday, a reporter from the New York Post sent me a video taken by a television news crew from a helicopter over Manhattan, showing a fast-moving ball of light during daytime. He asked: “Do you believe it is an object or a phenomenon of the camera or light? Does it appear to bear any resemblance to other types of UAP that have been reported to be seen around the world?” I thanked the reporter for sharing the interesting video, and explained that the moving spot is most likely an optical artifact from the helicopter glass in front of the camera, namely a bright spot from reflection of sunlight as the camera gradually changed its orientation relative to the Sun and the ground. But even if this was a real object, its apparent speed is of order the speed of sound and not extraordinary. The Galileo Project that I am leading just posted last week a new extensive paper that describes a detailed careful analysis of commissioning data on half a million aerial objects, collected over a period of five months. The paper was posted on this webpage. In the coming months, our research team will attempt to triangulate outliers and figure out whether they are exotic or mundane based on their measured distances. Two days ago, the new director of the Pentagon’s All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office, Jon Kosloski, stated in a U.S. Senate hearing: “We do have some very anomalous objects… Many reports resolve to commonplace objects like birds, balloons and unmanned systems, while others lack sufficient data for comprehensive analysis… only a small percentage of reports received by AARO are potentially anomalous.” Kosloski mentioned a UAP observed in 2013 near Aguadilla, Puerto Rico. The infrared video from a U.S. Customs and Border Patrol helicopter, shows the object flying above the ocean before disappearing into it, or possibly splitting in two. AARO assessed that the UAP was actually flying over the airport the entire time, and disappeared in the infrared imagery because it had the same temperature as the water behind it. The apparent splitting was due to two distinct objects that were close to each other, coming in and out of view. A “trans-medium” UAP that traveled between air and water and split in half, was explained by the new AARO director, Jon Kosloski, during a U.S. Senate hearing on November 19, 2024. (Image credit: AARO/DoD) Kosloski also reported that AARO explained the well-known GOFAST video, shot by a U.S. Navy fighter jet in 2016 off the coast of Florida. In that case, the object’s apparent speed in the video was actually due to parallax associated with the camera’s perspective. In another case from 2018, a drone flying over Mt. Etna “was actually 170 meters away from the plume — not flying through it.” AARO’s new report examines UAP cases dated between May 1, 2023 and June 1, 2024 as well as historical incidents that were not included in previous reports. AARO’s ability to resolve cases “remains constrained by a lack of timely and actionable sensor data.” AARO’s 2022 report studied 510 UAP cases reported by government agencies and the U.S. military. Out of those UAP, AARO was not able to identify a minority of 171 objects and stated: “Some of these uncharacterized UAP appear to have demonstrated unusual flight characteristics or performance capabilities, and require further analysis.” Identifying most of the unidentified might be satisfactory for national security purposes. But even if one object in a million is exotic, that particular one could inspire a revolution in astronomy. This is why the Galileo Project is conducting a thorough and careful systematic study of the sky over many months rather than rely on anecdotal reports by those who happened to be at the right place at the right time. By summer 2025, we hope to have three operating observatories with triangulation capabilities for identifying distances to millions of aerial objects. There is precedent for U.S. government data uncovering exotic phenomena while seeking the mundane, and as a result promoting new knowledge in astronomy. In 1967, gamma-ray bursts were discovered by the Vela satellites which were searching for flashes of high-energy photons from covert nuclear weapon tests above the atmosphere. After the bursts were identified as cosmic in origin, their existence was revealed to astronomers through a paper published in 1973 by a research team in Los Alamos National Laboratory. In 1997, the X-ray afterglows of the gamma-ray burst were linked to galaxies at cosmological distances. Long-duration bursts, lasting more than a few seconds, are now known to be emitted by relativistic jets piercing through the envelope of massive stars as their core collapses and gives birth to a black hole. The possibility that some UAP might have been sent by intelligent cosmic neighbors is the reason that the public is fascinated by their existence. Following Feynman’s advice, we should let data guide us rather than wishful thinking. The nature of UAP will be revealed by scientists, not journalists or politicians. The post UAPs: Exotic or Mundane? appeared first on Anomalien.com.

Leave it to America’s most popular country stars to give the rest of Hollywood a masterclass on unifying the country when it comes to participating in an awards show,— as this year’s event was completely void of political lectures.  On Wednesday, ABC presented the 58th Annual Country Music Awards, hosted by singers Luke Bryan and Lainey Wilson and Hall of Fame  quarterback Peyton Manning. Right off the bat, the hosts joked that they had already planned not to discuss politics during the show. Wilson: All right, side note, y'all. There is one thing that I want to say to everybody here about the recent results, whether the candidate you voted for won or lost, we all need to get together behind the winner. Manning: Whoa, whoa, we talked about this now. Let’s not get into politics tonight. Wilson: No, Peyton, I’m talking about people voting for the sexiest man alive. Over the years, unsuspecting Hollywood fans have been bombarded with the left-wing agenda, anti-Trump rants, and lectures on who to vote for from some of the most rich and powerful celebrities, among other crazy demonstrations. Not this time. The CMAs were all about honoring their best singers and performers without any distractions, which is a breath of fresh air considering how polarized everything has become. The group Old Dominion also carried on the message of ‘unity’ after being awarded their seventh Vocal Group of the Year win,— with lead singer Matthew Ramsey encouraging all artists and music creators to come together despite 'weird' times. Ramsey: If you are an artist of any type or a creator or a musician, this is when the world needs you the most, when it’s weird like it is right now. So get out there and get together and create.  It’s also worth noting, that the awards show was family-friendly, as there weren’t any hypersexualized or satanic performances. Most of the celebrities showed up in elegant or classic country attire, and not one man was spotted in women’s clothing.  While politics were skipped during the show, that didn't stop outsiders from accusing Country Music Association judges of racism for not giving singer Beyoncé any nominations for her country-themed album Cowboy Carter, which was one of the top country albums of the year.  Let’s Be Clear: The CMAs Don’t Deserve Beyoncé https://t.co/yA1P66NgDL — Harper’s BAZAAR (@harpersbazaarus) September 9, 2024 Many celebrities had weighed in on the alleged snub, including Luke Bryan who explained "a lot of great music is sometimes overlooked, and sometimes you don't get nominated." He said this during an interview with Sirius XM's Andy Cohen Live.  

Former NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams stopped by his old stomping grounds on Wednesday as he joined Late Night host Seth Meyers to recap the presidential election and discuss what Democrats need to do differently. Both men agreed that part of the problem Democrats face is that “there is a nihilism afoot” that makes it harder for the party to get its message across. One critique Williams did lob towards Democrats was that they “have become the fancy party,” but Meyers was not convinced, “But it’s so strange, because, of course, you know, they do still, you know, they do still win a bigger share of, like, the non-white working class. So, they are speaking to someone.”     He further wondered how a working class person could prefer Donald Trump, “I mean, I understand that it's getting eaten into, but I — you know at the same time, like, we're talking about it like — you know, and again, I agree they have to communicate better to the working class voter. But I sometimes think it's a little unfair to say, you know, they're elite, when they — certainly Joe Biden stood up for unions. And, you know — and I think it's very fair to say that Donald Trump, and certainly Elon Musk, will not. And there was a time where that meant something. And I don't quite know why it doesn't anymore.” As it was, Williams replied, “To use a big word, there is a nihilism afoot, and it has been since the first Trump term. Let's — you know, ‘It's not working for me, let's burn the damn thing down.’ And that's kind of a germ that's going around the world, it's not limited to us. So, these are gonna be — strap in, these are gonna be interesting times.” Meyers agreed, “I do think you're right about the nihilism. I think it's really tough to communicate a message when that is the pervasive feeling. But I think it's the job of Democrats, if they really want to get through, it's gonna be harder than they maybe put the effort in this time.” Part of Meyers’s problem is his unwillingness to consider that elitism, or, as Williams might say, fanciness, is not just about money or rich people versus the working class. It also involves the culture wars, Democrats being unwilling to offend progressives on crime, and immigration. Here is a transcript for the November 20-taped show: NBC Late Night with Seth Meyers 11/21/2024 1:12 AM ET BRIAN WILLIAMS: The Democrats have become the fancy party. SETH MEYERS: But it’s so strange, because, of course, you know, they do still, you know, they do still win a bigger share— WILLIAMS: Yes. MEYERS: — of, like, the non-white working class. So, they are speaking to someone. WILLIAMS: Yeah, they are. MEYERS: I mean, I understand that it's getting eaten into, but I — you know at the same time, like, we're talking about it like — you know, and again, I agree they have to communicate better to the working class voter. But I sometimes think it's a little unfair to say, you know, they're elite, when they — certainly Joe Biden stood up for unions. WILLIAMS: Yep. MEYERS: And, you know — and I think it's very fair to say that Donald Trump, and certainly Elon Musk, will not. And there was a time where that meant something. And I don't quite know why it doesn't anymore. WILLIAMS: To use a big word, there is a nihilism afoot, and it has been since the first Trump term. Let's — you know, "It's not working for me, let's burn the damn thing down." And that's kind of a germ that's going around the world, it's not limited to us. So, these are gonna be — strap in, these are gonna be interesting times. MEYERS: I do think you're right about the nihilism. I think it's really tough to communicate a message when that is the pervasive feeling. But I think it's the job of Democrats, if they really want to get through, it's gonna be harder than they maybe put the effort in this time. WILLIAMS: A lot of people would agree with you. MEYERS: It is just so lovely to see you. WILLIAMS: Oh, it's great to see you. MEYERS: I'll tell you, it's so nice to have you back in the building.

Amid the furor over the 2024 election, many leftists abandoned pro-free speech X for a social media alternative, and the results are stunning. Platform Bluesky is attempting to cater to its most anti-free speech users, claiming it will increase censorship to “max capacity,” but apparently it can’t crush speech fast enough to satisfy its user base. Many leftists, especially after the 2024 election turned into a landslide victory for Republicans, lashed out at President-elect Donald Trump’s ally and X owner Elon Musk, leaving X behind. Many chose to create accounts on Bluesky instead, and the platform soon announced that its censors couldn’t handle the deluge of censorship demands, though it plans to keep trying. The platform even encouraged users to report content for censorship. On Nov. 15, Bluesky Safety, the platform’s censorship team, posted, “Bluesky has grown by over 3M people in the last week — welcome! With every wave of growth naturally comes an increase in moderation reports. Here’s a status report on how the Trust & Safety team is handling it[.]” The account then acknowledgedthe massive flood of censorship requests and promised to “dial” its censorship group up to “max capacity.” Bluesky Safety explained, “In the past 24 hours, we have received more than 42,000 reports (an all-time high for one day). We’re receiving about 3,000 reports/hour. To put that into context, in all of 2023, we received 360k reports. We’re triaging this large queue so the most harmful content such as CSAM [child sex abuse material]  is removed quickly.”  There is “increased spam, scam, and trolling activity” on the platform, Bluesky Safety asserted, urging anti-speech users to “help us by reporting them by clicking the three-dot menu on each post/account.” Bluesky Safety concluded by promising increased censorship, “We appreciate your patience as we dial our moderation team up to max capacity and bring on new team members to support this load.” But when users are determined to be offended and demand censorship, they won’t stop even after moving to a more restricted platform. One high-profile, pro-free speech account already blanketed with censorship on Bluesky is The Babylon Bee. The Bee’s Editor-in-Chief Kyle Mann posted a screenshot on X Nov. 19 showing that each of the top three posts made by the satire outlet on Bluesky were censored for what the platform apparently considers “Intolerance.” Mann joked that The Bee’s “debut on Blue Sky is going great.” Intolerance is a highly subjective standard, and Bluesky’s Community Guidelines do not even seem to include anything specifically on intolerance, making the humorless censorship of The Bee’s jokes even more mystifying. The Babylon Bee is a member of the MRC-led Free Speech Alliance. Conservatives are under attack. Contact Bluesky here and demand that it be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

After failing to stop the return of former President Donald Trump to the White House, Google appears to have settled for going after his cabinet-level nominees.  On Nov. 19, MRC researchers searched Google for names of each of Trump’s cabinet nominations, and additionally the FCC chairman, and compared the news results against the AllSides media list, which classifies publications based on their “right” or “left” bias. MRC researchers found that in 10 out of 14 queries, Google provided zero right-leaning media sources on the first page of results. Worse still, even when Google did display news outlet articles in search results for the nominees’ names, it showed over 11 times more left-leaning media articles than right-leaning in its general search.  Google featured articles from leftist outlets including Teen Vogue, The Daily Beast, The Atlantic, CNN, The Hill, The New York Times and The Washington Post among many others. Indeed, out of the 100 news articles that Google displayed, the search engine produced a shabby eight articles from just three right leaning news outlets, Fox News, New York Post and Catholic News Agency. In follow-up queries, researchers examined the results of searching the same names using Google’s news tab. These searches produced similarly biased results. Searches for FCC Chairman nominee “Brendan Carr” and Trump’s other first fourteen cabinet-level appointments were filled with leftist and legacy media sources that far outnumbered any right-of-center results that appeared on the front page. Out of 130 news results that appeared on the first page of a Google news tab search, only 16 were from U.S.-based right-leaning sources.  The first page of the Google news tab search not only displayed articles from leftist outlets, but it also flooded the results with vicious or negative headlines and attacks about the potential cabinet secretaries. For example, the results for Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s name included a Vanity Fair piece titled “Cheryl Hines Has a Choice (Other Women Sure Don't!).” The article included aggressive and personal attacks on Kennedy’’s wife, even going so far ast to call for her to divorce her husband. RFK Jr. has been nominated for Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services.  Google search results for Trump’s nominee to run the Department of Justice, former Congressman Matt Gaetz, and Trump’s choice for Secretary of the Department of Defense, Pete Hegseth, were similarly littered with media outlets whose headlines skewed heavily against the nominees. Google also featured a Daily Beast article labeling Gov. Kristi Noem (R-SD), potentially the next Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, a “puppy killer” in its headline.  Google featured similarly ugly attacks from leftist publications such as Salon, Teen Vogue, The New Republic, Mother Jones, CNN, NBC News and others. The search engine did not provide any relevant news results for Department of Energy nominee Christopher Wright and Veteran Affairs secretary nominee Douglas Collins.  This study follows a breathtaking campaign of election interference by Google exposed by the Media Research Center. A Sept. 6 MRC Free Speech America study showed that Google required users to wade through a deluge of leftist news articles before getting to Trump’s campaign website. This study was followed by studies on Oct. 1, Oct. 9, Oct. 15, Oct. 22, Oct. 30 and Election Day itself that demonstrated that Google was burying right-of-center search results. The Trump prompt for Oct. 9 produced the most egregious results. The Oct. 9 study found that Google buried the first U.S.-based right-of-center result—a Fox News video—for the Trump prompt on page 23. Nowhere on any of the 26 pages of results did a U.S.-based right-of-center news article appear.  Methodology  For this report, MRC Free Speech America analyzed the Nov. 19 Google Search and News tab results for the first and last names of fourteen men and women nominated for cabinet-level positions in the second Trump administration as well as Trump’s choice for FCC Chairman. MRC Free Speech America created an algorithm to automate this process in a clean environment. A “clean environment” allows for organic search to populate results without the influence of prior search history and tracking cookies. MRC Free Speech America also utilized the AllSides media bias chart as a gauge to determine which outlets are “right” and “lean right.” AllSides notes it has a “patent on rating bias and use[s] multiple methodologies,” not a homogenous group or an algorithm. “Our methods are: Blind Bias Surveys of Americans, Editorial Reviews by a multipartisan team of panelists who look for common types of media bias, independent reviews, and third-party data.” Readers should be aware that this report only uses the AllSides list to analyze ratings of outlets considered by AllSides to be “right” and “lean right” and does not necessarily reflect MRC’s characterizations of these outlets. Nominees searched include: Douglas Burgum, Brendan Carr, Douglas Collins, Sean Duffy, Tulsi Gabbard, Matthew Gaetz, Peter Hegseth, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Howard Lutnick, Kristi Noem, Marco Rubio, Elise Stefanik, Susan Wiles, Christopher Wright and Lee Zeldin.  Conservatives are under attack! Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Matt Gaetz has been tapped by President-elect Donald Trump to serve as attorney general, and those on thee left have made it clear they’re unhappy with the decision. Which is why Glenn Beck and Stu Burguiere of “The Glenn Beck Program” are skeptical of the recent “hacker” who reportedly gained access to testimony from the congressional investigation into Gaetz. The unidentified hacker has reportedly obtained the sworn testimony of Gaetz’s accusers from the House ethics probe through a law firm involved in a civil suit against Joel Greenberg. Greenburg is supposedly an acquaintance of Gaetz who is serving an 11-year prison term for sex trafficking. The file features testimony under oath by a woman who claims that she engaged in sex with Gaetz when she was only 17 and from another woman who claims to have witnessed it. “Really amazing how we have all of this technology that could track and listen and find anything, every keystroke recorded, but we can’t find this hacker,” Glenn comments. “It’s funny because someone will come in and hack some cell phone provider's information. Millions, billions of records go out of millions of people, and we won’t know about it for six months. The next day, we have learned all about this hack. It’s almost like someone who knew about the hack was able to immediately give that information to the New York Times,” Stu says. “In this case, there’s definitely no interest — people who don’t like Matt Gaetz: Democrats, and some Republicans — no chance that this was a setup and leaked to the New York Times, specifically within, gosh, 24 hours,” he adds. And Stu’s not wrong, as Gaetz definitely has ruffled some important feathers. “He was effective. He was probably the biggest voice against the corruption at the DOJ,” Glenn says, adding, “the report comes years after the DOJ dropped its investigation into the same claims on the grounds that two central witnesses had serious credibility issues.” Want more from Glenn Beck?To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

President-elect Donald Trump announced last week that Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Ohio entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy will lead a new federal agency, the Department of Government Efficiency. The duo tasked with dismantling the federal bureaucracy, slashing unnecessary regulations, optimizing government spending, and restructuring government agencies provided a clear sense in a op-ed Wednesday of how DOGE would operate as well as its strategy moving forward. At the outset, the duo noted that the country is effectively run by unelected and largely unaccountable bureaucrats. Most legal edicts aren't laws enacted by Congress but 'rules and regulations' promulgated by unelected bureaucrats — tens of thousands of them each year. Most government enforcement decisions and discretionary expenditures aren't made by the democratically elected president or even his political appointees but by millions of unelected, unappointed civil servants within government agencies who view themselves as immune from firing thanks to civil-service protections. With the understanding that this dysfunctional state of play is "antidemocratic and antithetical to the Founders' vision," the duo emphasized the need to remedy the bureaucratic bloat and indicated how DOGE would help. Musk and Ramaswamy are apparently now helping the Trump transition team form a group of "small-government crusaders" that will work hand in glove with the White House Office of Management and Budget, which oversees the implementation of the president's vision across the executive branch. The duo, touting themselves as "outside volunteers, not federal officials or employees," would advise this group in pursuit of deregulation, mass layoffs, and cost savings. Deregulation Rather than rely upon new or existing legislation to effect change, DOGE will rely largely on executive action, guided by the Constitution and two recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings: West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency and Loper Bright v. Raimondo. 'The Constitution does not authorize agencies to use pen-and-phone regulations as substitutes for laws passed by the people's representatives.' In West Virginia v. EPA, which was decided in June 2022, the high court considered whether a federal agency, in this case the EPA, could adopt a consequential regulatory scheme without Congress first conferring it the authority to do so. Chief Justice John Roberts noted in the opinion of the court that the decision to regulate greenhouse gas emissions at a level that would force a nationwide transition away from the use of coal to generate energy is a decision "of such magnitude and consequence [that it] rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body." Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in his concurring opinion, "The Constitution does not authorize agencies to use pen-and-phone regulations as substitutes for laws passed by the people's representatives. In our Republic, 'it is the peculiar province of the legislature to prescribe general rules for the government of society.'" In Loper Bright v. Raimondo, which was decided in June 2024, the high court overruled the Chevron doctrine that previously had courts defer to a regulatory agency's interpretation of federal legislation in cases where the law in question was ambiguous or silent on an issue. The Supreme Court ruled that courts must exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority and that they may not defer to an agency interpretation of a law simply because a statute is ambiguous. Musk and Ramaswamy noted that these two cases "suggest that a plethora of current federal regulations exceed the authority Congress has granted under the law." Granted there are hundreds of federal agencies, each of which have turned out oodles of rules and regulations in recent years, this could prove a herculean effort. The Federal Register, the daily archive of rules and regulations, reportedly ended 2023 with over 90,000 pages and America ended up with another 3,018 federal rules on the books. This year, federal agencies passed 66 significant rules in April alone, 34 of which the Regulatory Studies Center at George Washington University indicated were economically significant. 'Identify the minimum number of employees required at an agency for it to perform its constitutionally permissible ... functions.' The duo indicated in their op-ed that legal experts embedded in federal agencies will employ advanced technology to more swiftly apply the two Supreme Court rulings to such federal regulations. They did not specify which technology, but generative artificial intelligence systems could certainly come in handy. DOGE will present its findings of rules likely voided by the two rulings to Trump, "who can, by executive action, immediately pause the enforcement of those regulations and initiate the process for review and rescission. This would liberate individuals and businesses from illicit regulations never passed by Congress and stimulate the U.S. economy." Pre-empting accusations of executive overreach, the duo stressed that the "use of executive orders to substitute for lawmaking by adding burdensome new rules is a constitutional affront, but the use of executive orders to roll back regulations that wrongly bypassed Congress is legitimate and necessary to comply with the Supreme Court's recent mandates." Mass federal layoffs Extra to eliminating bureaucratic red tape that does not belong, the duo plans on handing out pink slips to superfluous bureaucrats en masse. After all, Musk and Ramaswamy figure that fewer rules on the books would likely require fewer enforcers: DOGE intends to work with embedded appointees in agencies to identify the minimum number of employees required at an agency for it to perform its constitutionally permissible and statutorily mandated functions. The number of federal employees to cut should be at least proportionate to the number of federal regulations that are nullified: Not only are fewer employees required to enforce fewer regulations, but the agency would produce fewer regulations once its scope of authority is properly limited. Likely anticipating accusations of callousness, the duo indicated that the droves of bureaucrats driven out of federal agencies will be afforded help transitioning into the private sector. Those unwilling or unable to hack it in the world of real competition might alternatively be provided incentives for early retirement or severance payments for voluntary exits. 'If I had to commute, I would resign.' The duo further signaled how Trump could get around statutory civil-service protections and the caltrops President Joe Biden lay in the way of rules shielding bureaucrats from accountability: The president could apparently execute "reductions in force" that do not target specific employees and "prescribe rules governing the competitive service," thereby "curtail[ing] administrative overgrowth, from large-scale firings to relocation of federal agencies out of the Washington area." Among the rules that might prompt bureaucrats to jump ship would be requiring them to show up to work five days a week. "If federal employees don't want to show up, American taxpayers shouldn't pay them for the Covid-era privilege of staying home," wrote the duo. A number of federal bureaucrats speaking to CNN under the condition of anonymity confirmed that they would not be able to complete a return to the workplace. "The stress would be through the roof," said one bureaucrat. "I am at the point where if I had to commute, I would resign. I would take this as a sign to move on and start a new chapter in my life." Cost savings While the duo and Trump figure the 1974 Impoundment Control Act, which bars the president from cutting expenditures authorized by Congress, would not survive a challenge before the Supreme Court, DOGE would instead take aim at the "$500 billion plus in annual federal expenditures that are unauthorized by Congress or being used in ways that Congress never intended, from $535 million a year to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and $1.5 billion for grants to international organizations to nearly $300 million to progressive groups like Planned Parenthood." The DOGE account on X, which has been highlighting possible cuts and savings, highlighted a Congressional Budget Office report in July that noted $516 billion in appropriations for 2024 was associated with 491 expired authorizations of appropriations. $320 billion of that total was provided for activities whose authorities expired over 10 years ago. Extra to defunding Planned Parenthood and other outfits to the extent they can and making sure taxpayer money is not squandered on partisan pet projects lacking congressional re-authorization, the DOGE duo seeks to re-examine the federal government's procurement process and push for large-scale audits during temporary payment suspensions. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Republican candidate Nick Begich has officially unseated incumbent Democratic Rep. Mary Peltola for Alaska's sole House seat on Wednesday, boosting the GOP's narrow majority in the chamber. Begich won with 51.3% of the vote, while Peltola brought in 48.7% of the vote. Peltola first flipped the seat in 2022 after Alaska introduced ranked-choice voting, which allows voters to rank their preferred candidates on the ballot rather than choose between the Democratic and Republican candidates who won their respective primaries. 'The path ahead will not be built by one person or three people working for all of Alaska but by all Alaskans working together to build a future that works for all of us.'Going into the 2024 election, there were two Republican candidates up against the Democratic incumbent: Begich and Nancy Dahlstrom. Republicans were concerned that two GOP candidates would split the vote as they did in 2022, so Dahlstrom dropped out in August to avoid becoming a spoiler candidate. "The Ranked Choice Voting tabulation has been completed and has confirmed our win beyond any residual doubt," Begich said in a Wednesday post on X. "I am truly honored to have earned your trust and support." "Alaska's potential is unmatched, but much work remains for Alaskans to fully realize that potential," Begich continued. "I am committed to fighting for our jobs and economy, protecting our unique way of life, and ensuring that our voices are heard loud and clear in Washington." Republicans now hold 219 seats, while Democrats hold 213. Although Republicans have the advantage, their margin has been narrowed due to President-elect Donald Trump's recent nominations that have included three Republican congressmen. "The path ahead will not be built by one person or three people working for all of Alaska but by all Alaskans working together to build a future that works for all of us," Peltola said in a Wednesday post on X. "Nick, I'm rooting for you," Peltola continued. "Please don't forget when DC people keep telling you that you are one of three, you are actually one of more than seven hundred thousand Alaskans who are ready to fight for our state, myself included." Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The Biden-Harris administration is making significant policy changes ahead of President-elect Donald Trump's inauguration in an apparent effort to obstruct the incoming administration's mass deportation plans.The New York Post reported Thursday that President Joe Biden is in a rush to roll out new policies that would ease restrictions on illegal aliens, according to sources.'They're going to try to put up as many roadblocks and obstacles and throw as many grenades as they can on their way out.'The Biden administration is reportedly gearing up to launch an Immigration and Customs Enforcement mobile application in New York City in early December. The ICE Portal is designed to allow illegal immigrants to check in remotely through the mobile app rather than appearing in person at their local ICE office.According to the Post, Homeland Security sources are concerned that the "glitchy and unreliable" mobile app will allow illegal aliens to evade federal authorities. Sources claimed that the administration is pushing forward with the expedited launch despite "extreme issues" with the portal during pilot program testing.During in-person check-ins, ICE agents review an individual's past arrests and check for outstanding warrants, a process that the administration's mobile app will not replicate. Also, during those appearances, illegal aliens are required to provide proof of their current address.Further, the app is reportedly not compatible with Android phones. When accessed by computer, the portal does not collect GPS location information. While accessing via phone does collect location data, that information is gathered for only seven days.A source told the Post, "We need that information that if these people don't go to court, they have absconded, they have a final order of removal. We need that data … to go start looking for people."The initial rollout of the program will reportedly be extended to up to 100,000 illegal aliens.In another move to undermine Trump's immigration crackdown, the Biden administration is also aiming to allow illegal immigrants to dispute federal government orders for electronic tracking. Location monitoring devices, such as ankle bracelets, are provided to individuals through the agency's Alternatives to Detention Program while they are awaiting immigration hearings."It gives the alien the ability to get off the program entirely," a source told the Post.Another source stated, "What it is doing is creating a lot of burdensome administrative paperwork justifying what they're doing now. I can tell you a lot of employees would just look at this [as] this is too much work. Most cases, they'll just terminate them from the program and not have to go through the appeal process."The news outlet reported that experts are concerned that Trump's attempts to revert these last-minute Biden initiatives could be delayed due to procedural obstacles and could potentially face legal challenges.Former acting Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Mark Morgan called the Biden administration's moves "an obstructionist transition" and "the opposite of a peaceful transition of power" previously promised to Trump."What they're trying to do in the last final day, they're going to try to put up as many roadblocks and obstacles and throw as many grenades as they can on their way out," Morgan told the Post.ICE did not respond to a request for comment from the Post.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!