Blanche will oversee the department’s daily operations

'Caught withholding aid from storm victims in Florida'

Massive Shift in Urban Voting Helped Elect Trump

On Wednesday's CNN This Morning, host Kasie Hunt and international anchor Max Foster fretted that former Governor Mike Huckabee (R-AR) has been too pro-Israel to the point of being controversial as the two discussed President-elect Donald Trump nominating him to be ambassador to Israel. Hunt set up the segment by introducing a clip of Huckabee recently posted by CNN's Kfile unit -- which typically tries to uncover controversial or embarrassing comments by politicians: "Mike Huckabee is Donald Trump's pick to serve as U.S. ambassador to Israel. The former Arkansas governor and presidential candidate has been a staunch defender of Israel throughout his career. CNN's Kfile uncovering this comment from Huckabee in 2008." Then a clip of the former governor arguing that the Palestinians should not be considered a distinct group of people during his 2008 campaign for President: "Basically, there really is no such thing as -- I have to be careful saying this because people will really get upset -- there's really no such thing as a Palestinian. There's not."     Without clarifying that there is an argument that Palestinian Arabs are Arabs just like Arabs in neighboring countries, and so could be absorbed as part of their nations rather than treating Palestinians as entitled to live in the West Bank, the CNN host continued: "Huckabee has also said if a Palestinian state is ever created, it should be located in Egypt, Syria or Jordan." Then came a clip of Huckabee from 2017: "There are certain words I refuse to use. There is no such thing as a West Bank -- it's Judea and Samaria. There's no such thing as a settlement -- there are communities, there are neighborhoods, there are cities. There's no such thing as an occupation." As Hunt brought aboard Foster for discussion, it was not mentioned that there is an argument that the West Bank should be considered "disputed" territory rather than "occupied" because Israel took control of the land from Jordan which did not have an internationally recognized right to hold the territory. Additionally, it has been argued that the settlements are also not illegal in spite of claims by different countries.  Turning to Foster, Hunt posed: There are, of course, been some particularly conservatives in Israel likely pleased by the Huckabee choice, but, as you could hear from his language there, he comes down on a certain side of very controversial ways of talking about the region -- about Palestinians. What is the reaction broadly across the region? Again, without explaining the rationale behind Huckabee's statements, Foster cast them as "extreme": His views very clear, and, you know -- "there is no such thing as an occupation." It doesn't just go against what Palestinians think -- it goes against what many of Israel's allies think as well -- that these are illegal occupations of the West Bank. So the Palestinians are facing a situation where they are, you know, this American ambassador will take the view that they might not necessarily be allowed to stay in their homes effectively, and that land could go away, and they could be relocated. So these are extreme views actually -- a minority view that, you know, if you take the world view on what's happening there, but a very clear statement by President Trump about the sort of person he thinks should be in that role, so presumably reflects, you know, what will be his administration's views, and they are the most powerful foreign power really in that region. Hunt then conceded that, in Israel, Huckabee's views may, in fact, be in tune with the current conventional wisdom about whether a two-state solution should be pursued. Transcript follows: CNN This Morning November 13, 2024 5:13 a.m. Eastern KASIE HUNT: Mike Huckabee is Donald Trump's pick to serve as U.S. ambassador to Israel. The former Arkansas governor and presidential candidate has been a staunch defender of Israel throughout his career. CNN's KFile uncovering this comment from Huckabee in 2008. MIKE HUCKABEE [from 2008]: Basically, there really is no such thing as -- I have to be careful saying this because people will really get upset -- there's really no such thing as a Palestinian. There's not. HUNT: Huckabee has also said if a Palestinian state is ever created, it should be located in Egypt, Syria or Jordan. HUCKABEE [on 01/03/17]: There are certain words I refuse to use. There is no such thing as a West Bank -- it's Judea and Samaria. There's no such thing as a settlement -- they are communities, they are neighborhoods, they are cities. There's no such thing as an occupation. HUNT: CNN's Max Foster joins us live now from London. Max, good morning to you. There are, of course, been some particularly conservatives in Israel likely pleased by the Huckabee choice, but, as you could hear from his language there, he comes down on a certain side of very controversial ways of talking about the region -- about Palestinians. What is the reaction broadly across the region? MAX FOSTER: Well, his views very clear, and, you know -- "there is no such thing as an occupation." It doesn't just go against what Palestinians think. It goes against what many of Israel's allies think as well -- that these are illegal occupations of the West Bank. So the Palestinians are facing a situation where they are, you know, this American ambassador will take the view that they might not necessarily be allowed to stay in their homes effectively, and that land could go away, and they could be relocated, so these are extreme views actually -- a minority view that, you know, if you take the world view on what's happening there, but a very clear statement by President Trump about the sort of person he thinks should be in that role, so presumably reflects, you know, what will be his administration's views, and they are the most powerful foreign power really in that region. HUNT: Max, it also seems to be a relatively clear indication of where the Trump administration is going to come down on the question of pushing for a two-state solution, which is obviously something that, you know, if you go back to George W. Bush's presidency, that was something that the Republican Party actually had been -- been pushing for -- had been hoping for -- seems to align with the political realities on the ground in Israel where Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, you know, we talked to Joe Rubin which is a former State Department official who was on the program yesterday basically saying, "two-state solution is not part of the conversation in Israel right now -- it's basically off the table." Does this pick seem to align with reality as Rubin described it? FOSTER: You know, a two-state solution is the one solution that most countries seem to agree is the only long-term solution there, and so much policy in the Middle East has focused on that as an ultimate goal. So it changes everything if that is no longer an option. And if it's Mike Huckabee as part of this process, then he would have to contradict himself that he's now going to start working towards a two-state solution. So it's very clear focus of intent here, so then you do start asking, "What is the long-term solution? What is Donald Trump's solution to peace in the Middle East?" which is something he's promising to bring in. And if it's not a two-state solution, then is it, you know, allowing Israel to take over that land, relocating Palestinians? There are so many questions that come out of that, so I think, you know, this is one ambassador. We know what his views are. We need to hear more clearly about how he intends to push them through, but, most importantly, whether Trump is going to empower him and whether Trump very much believes in those views, too. HUNT: All right, Max Foster for us this morning. Max, always grateful to have you. Thank you so much.

Donald Trump dealt an earth-shattering blow to the American left. The reality television star not only secured a convincing win in the Electoral College but also captured the popular vote and carried down-ballot Republicans to victory, with the GOP taking control of the Senate and likely retaining the House. Typically, such a decisive mandate for the opposition would lead a political party to reflect on the policies or rhetoric that contributed to such a defeat. But Democrats are having none of that.Instead of examining their platform, tone toward the American people, or use of power, liberal pundits and politicians have reached a different conclusion. From MSNBC to CNN and HBO, they have conducted election postmortems, blaming their loss on one main problem: that the American people have too much free speech.Democrats had constructed a reality in which their ideology was unquestionable and their victory inevitable.A few thoughtful voices on the left have suggested that policies like opening the border, demonizing men, ignoring the economic struggles of middle Americans, and promoting radical gender politics to children may have hurt the Democrats' chances. Yet these moderating voices have been quickly labeled as racist and sexist, silenced by progressives deeply invested in their own radical ideology. Instead, the left has chosen to lay the blame for its loss on alternative media.The left has sounded the alarm about the dangers of misinformation and disinformation for years. Progressives once held a near-total monopoly over the elite institutions that shape ideological consensus in America. In a world where individuals are often isolated from real interactions or events, the dominant narrative provided by news and entertainment had the power to define reality. That is how a nation can be convinced to treat a severe flu like the Black Death. Democrats have lived inside this self-constructed reality for so long that they have forgotten its artificial nature — like a fish that doesn’t know it’s wet.Progressives genuinely believe Americans are inherently racist, sexist, and homophobic, and they worry that without a controlled flow of carefully curated information, people will revert to their “brutal” nature and start throwing Nazi salutes in honor of the eternal Trumpenreich. Leftist operatives don’t view themselves as propagandists because they rely on narratives shaped by a network of credentialed institutions.When progressives talk about “our democracy,” they really mean the consensus upheld by “experts” who show loyalty to their ideology. Any information that contradicts this narrative becomes “misinformation” — not because it’s factually incorrect but because it challenges their carefully curated information ecosystem.In this moment of utter defeat, Democrats have pointed fingers at podcasters like Joe Rogan and Theo Von, frustrated by their influence on young men. Some leftist pundits even suggest the need to create a “progressive Joe Rogan” or build their own network of influencers.But this approach is delusional on multiple levels. The left already has a massive influence network that spans mainstream media, Hollywood, corporate America, academia, and the unelected federal bureaucracy. Progressives don’t view this as an “influence network,” however. They see it as basic institutional reality. They have convinced themselves that the shadows they cast on the wall are reality, and anything outside them is nefarious and artificial.Progressives have plenty of young male influencers, like David Pakman and Hasan Piker. These voices enjoy major funding and the advantage of speaking with little to no fear of censorship from big tech. But it is exactly this obvious alliance with the status quo that dooms their efforts. Liberal commentators aren’t rebels speaking truth to power; they’re pushing on an open door. Their apparent lack of authenticity is palpable, and audiences sense it. This disconnect is so pronounced that Pakman recently made a video addressing the fact that his own audience is leaving in droves.The left’s challenge isn’t a lack of media reach. Despite emerging cracks in their foundation, progressives still hold significant influence over legacy media, education, and government bureaucracies that shape public opinion in the United States. The real problem is that each of these institutions has sacrificed its credibility in pursuit of ideological control. Soft power is delicate. It requires disciplined actors who can leverage institutional control without overtly advancing their own interests. Progressives have lost all such discipline and burned the precious currency of institutional legitimacy for short-term gain. Now they will reap the whirlwind.The left still has extensive media representation, but it no longer holds a media monopoly. Despite a substantial advantage in funding, prestige, and infrastructure, audiences are abandoning traditional media because of their consistent misinformation. They lied about the border, misled on the pandemic, skewed coverage of Trump, manipulated poll results, and even deluded themselves into thinking Kamala Harris could win a presidential election. Even in defeat, progressive commentators remain oblivious to the reality they've so fervently insulated themselves from.Leftists now watch the success of podcasters like Rogan and platforms like X, marveling at their influence. On HBO panels and in New York Times columns, they exclaim, “Media can shape reality! I’ve got to get me some of that!” The lack of self-awareness is remarkable. Yet Democrats cannot produce a candidate capable of appearing on Rogan’s show, let alone replicate his authentic style. Rogan may not be conservative, but he doesn’t dismiss Americans or their concerns, offering an everyman quality that is hard to fabricate.The Democratic Party’s problem isn’t a lack of media reach; it’s a toxic message and an unwillingness to engage with middle America. The party demonizes young white men and labels middle Americans as “trash,” alienating these demographics. The problem isn’t that comedians have podcasts that diverge from the Democratic Party line; it’s the Democrats’ toxic disregard for average Americans’ concerns.Democrats had constructed a reality in which their ideology was unquestionable and their victory inevitable. Only “outdated” institutions like the Electoral College and voter ID stood between progressives and the “end of history.” Now, a resounding defeat in the popular vote has left them bewildered, searching for someone to blame. There will be no introspection or lessons learned. Instead, leftists have doubled down on radical policies and contempt for Americans. It’s a powerful reminder that decadence breeds weakness and insularity fosters delusion.

Donald Trump has made it official: Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy have been tapped to run a new “Department of Government Efficiency” (or DOGE), tasked with slashing the federal bureaucracy and spending. “Their duty will be over by July 4, 2026, which is the 250th anniversary of America. So we’ve got a lot of work to do until then,” Glenn Beck of “The Glenn Beck Program” comments, thrilled with the news. The point of the Department of Government Efficiency is cutting waste in the government — though that might include mass firings of government employees. “Ramaswamy has come up with this great idea of how to fire people. OK, we know the problem is that you just can’t fire people because they’re just going to take you to court,” Glenn says. “If you’re running a company, and you need to reduce the size of the company, you will have companies that will just cut whole divisions because they don’t want any of the lawsuits.” “It has to be everybody, right? So what Ramaswamy has come up with, and he says this is only a thought exercise, but I think it’s brilliant. What he’s come up with is ‘We’re going to reduce the government by half, and here’s what we’re going to do. We’re going to say everyone who has an odd number at the end of their social security number, you’re fired,’” Glenn explains. However, if an employee is elected to the office they hold, they can’t be fired this way. “If you’re elected into that office, you’re not fired. But everybody else, because we’re reducing the size of the government by half,” Glenn says. While Stu Burguiere loves the idea of reducing the government by half, he’s skeptical of the method potentially being employed. “Merit has nothing to do with random groups of firing, you want to fire the employees that suck,” Stu says. “To be able to get to the place where you have merit, you have to reduce the size of the government first. You have blood letting that have to happen,” Glenn responds. 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.

Liberals online began wailing and gnashing their teeth almost immediately after President-elect Donald Trump nominated Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to a seat in his Cabinet on Thursday.As had long been rumored, Trump tapped RFK Jr. to be health and human services secretary. During his independent run for president, RFK Jr. made health a major focus of his campaign.'Putting an anti-vaxxer in charge of public health is like putting the Unabomber in charge of the mail.'After Kennedy dropped out in August and formally endorsed Trump, social media became ablaze with the slogan "Make America Healthy Again," a phrase that Trump often uttered in the close of his rally speeches."I am thrilled to announce Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as The United States Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). For too long, Americans have been crushed by the industrial food complex and drug companies who have engaged in deception, misinformation, and disinformation when it comes to Public Health," Trump wrote in a statement posted to X late Thursday afternoon.In his statement, Trump also called public health and safety an administration's "most important role" but said that lately, Americans have endured an "overwhelming Health Crisis" on account of "harmful chemicals, pollutants, pesticides, pharmaceutical products, and food additives."Under Kennedy's leadership, health agencies will fight back against the chronic disease "epidemic," return to the "Gold Standard" of scientific research, and become "beacons of Transparency," Trump continued. — (@) CNN reported that Kennedy accepted the nomination sometime on Thursday.In its article about the RFK nomination, the liberal outfit also described Kennedy as "one of the nation’s most prominent anti-vaccine conspiracy theorists" and accused him of spreading "false conspiracy theories about the safety and efficacy of vaccines." However, the outlet did not provide any examples of such alleged conspiracy theories.The New York Times also claimed in its headline about the nomination that Kennedy "spread false information about vaccines." Liberals online melted down over the news of Kennedy's nomination as well."Putting an anti-vaxxer in charge of public health is like putting the Unabomber in charge of the mail," tweeted the left-wing influencer known as Jo."It’s difficult to describe how utterly wretched RFK Jr. is. Not that I necessarily expect them to, but the Republican Senate *has* to put their foot down here. He’s one of the most deranged sociopaths in public life, and his war on childhood vaccination is unconscionable," wrote a user with 19K followers."RFK Jr. ran a spoiler campaign to help elect Donald Trump. Now, he’s reaping the benefits with a position that will jeopardize the health of millions of Americans," said a group of Democratic activists called End Citizens United.However, not all Democrats assailed the pick. Gov. Jared Polis of Colorado in fact cheered it, claiming that RFK Jr. would help take "on big pharma and the corporate ag oligopoly.""He will face strong special interest opposition on these, but I look forward to partnering with him to truly make America healthy again and I hope that we can finally make progress on these important issues," Polis added.One industry likely to be upset by the pick is Big Pharma. Shortly after Trump announced the nomination, the stocks of many pharmaceutical companies reportedly tanked.Kennedy did not make a statement about the Cabinet position but did retweet Trump's statement. Soon after Trump's landslide election victory, Kennedy hinted that he likely would be heavily involved in public health agencies during Trump's second term."President Trump has given me three instructions," Kennedy said, according to CNN. "He wants the corruption and the conflicts out of the regulatory agencies. He wants to return the agencies to the gold standard, empirically-based, evidence-based, science and medicine that they were once famous for. And he wants to end the chronic disease epidemic with measurable impacts on a diminishment of chronic disease within two years."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Ricky Gervais Announces That He's NOT Leaving X

NBC’s Ken Dilanian Says Matt Gaetz Nomination Is ‘Mind Boggling’

From injuries to scholarships or just opportunity and privacy, the Newsmax special "Foul Play: Athletes Speak Out" investigates the growing trend of transgender individuals in women's sports: the continued push, the criticism, and the consequences.