National School Choice Week begins Sunday after the school choice movement’s most successful year ever and with the promise of more momentum going forward. But not everyone is celebrating. A highly organized‚ well-financed coalition of two dozen national and local left-wing advocacy organizations‚ teachers unions‚ and associations of government bureaucrats have teamed up to fight back against parents who seek greater educational opportunities for their children. In this coalition’s view‚ families should have the choice of any school they want‚ so long as it’s run by the government. The left-wing coalition—under the anodyne-sounding name Partnership for the Future of Learning—is set to launch a disinformation campaign against school choice Monday‚ according to documents obtained by The Daily Signal. The campaign includes a glossy website‚ talking points‚ shareable graphics‚ and ready-made messages tailored for different audiences and social media platforms. Predictably‚ the Partnership for the Future of Learning is pushing tired‚ one-sided‚ and debunked propaganda meant to scare families into believing that school choice policies are destructive‚ unaccountable‚ and (of course) racist. Instead of trusting themselves‚ the coalition argues‚ parents should trust “the experts”—the same “experts” who kept schools closed unnecessarily‚ causing massive learning loss; imposed draconian-yet-ineffective mask mandates; and put boys in the girls’ locker rooms and porn in the school libraries. These “experts” also divide everyone into “oppressors” and “the oppressed” based on immutable characteristics; segregate students by race: think “individualism” and “objectivity” are white supremacy; teach that there is an infinite number of genders; keep secrets from parents about their children’s mental and emotional health; and can’t tell what a woman is. The Left has hegemonic control over the government-run district school system. School choice is a threat to the Left’s hegemony because it shifts the locus of control over education from bureaucrats and politicians to parents. It takes a sustained regimen of indoctrination and social engineering for people to believe some of the Left’s more outlandish orthodoxies‚ so it can’t afford to allow families to choose schools that teach authentic history and science‚ let alone traditional morality. Perhaps that’s why leftists have no compunction about openly lying in their messaging materials. Here are just three of the more egregious examples of disinformation about school choice from the Partnership for the Future of Learning. 1. Disinformation: School choice policies are “spreading despite overwhelming evidence that they are harmful public policy” and “do not have accountability measures that would ensure all students receive an effective and inclusive education.” Reality: The evidence on school choice is‚ indeed‚ overwhelming—overwhelmingly positive. The coalition’s materials lemon-pick the few studies finding negative effects on student performance from private school choice programs. But the materials ignore the much larger number of studies that find positive effects on student performance as well as numerous other measures‚ including educational attainment‚ parent satisfaction‚ district school performance‚ civic values and practices‚ racial and ethnic integration‚ fiscal effects‚ and school safety. The education reform organization EdChoice has compiled every high-quality study on the effects of school choice and found that 84% of the studies find statistically significant positive effects‚ while only 6% find any negative effects. Source: EdChoice‚ The 123s of School Choice: 2023 Edition Government-run schools are buried under mountains of regulations that have failed to produce “effective and inclusive” education. The best form of accountability is making education providers directly accountable to parents. 2. Disinformation: “Private school vouchers are historically rooted in segregation‚ discrimination‚ and racism. … School vouchers were first introduced during the civil rights era when efforts to desegregate schools were at a peak.” Reality: School choice has its roots in 18th-century liberalism‚ was used as a tool to foster racial integration during the civil rights movement. It provides disadvantaged minorities with greater education opportunities today. Although public schools remain highly racially stratified‚ research shows that school choice policies foster racial integration. It is the opponents of school choice who are standing in the schoolhouse door. Contrary to the Left’s origin story worthy of a cartoon villain‚ school choice wasn’t born out of opposition to desegregation efforts. The history of school choice goes back at least as far as 1791‚ when Founding Father Thomas Paine proposed a voucher-style system of education financing in his book “Rights of Man.” In 1859‚ John Stuart Mill likewise proposed a proto-voucher system in his essay “On Liberty.” The Partnership for the Future of Learning points to some segregationists who wanted to open private‚ segregated academies funded via vouchers. But the coalition conveniently ignores the fact that integrationists already were using private schools to foster racial integration while government’s district school system was segregated. Moreover‚ many segregationists‚ like those running the Virginia Education Association teachers union‚ opposed voucher plans because they feared that school choice  would lead to racially integrated schools. They already had found ways to skirt the Supreme Court’s 1954 ruling against racially segregated schools in Brown v. Board of Education by redrawing district boundaries along racial lines. That said‚ what really matters is not why people supported or opposed a given policy decades ago—do liberals support eliminating the minimum wage because it was a tool to keep minorities out of the labor pool in the early 20th century?—but what the effects of that policy are today. As noted above‚ eight studies have examined the effect of private school choice policies on racial integration. Seven found positive effects and one found no statistically significant difference. This shouldn’t be surprising because America’s residentially assigned district school system is still highly racially stratified. 3. Disinformation: “Public education is foundational to democracy and democratic institutions and provides all students and families with certain rights and protections that are necessary for effective and inclusive education.” Reality: School choice is better for democracy than government-run schooling. The claim by the Partnership for the Future of Learning that government-run schooling is “foundational for democracy” is clearly false‚ since democracy in America long predates the government school system. Self-government does rely upon an educated citizenry‚ but as Keri Ingraham and I explained in an October commentary for The Daily Signal‚ government schools are neither necessary nor sufficient to produce an informed citizenry: Government schools are clearly not sufficient to produce an informed citizenry because our more than century-long experiment with K-12 public education has produced dismal results. Nearly nine out of 10 adults attended a government-run K-12 school‚ yet fewer than half of Americans can name the three branches of government—and a quarter can’t name any branch at all. … On the most recent National Assessment for Education Progress‚ American students’ history scores hit an all-time low. As the Associated Press reported‚ “40% of eighth grade students are performing below basic proficiency in history‚ meaning they likely cannot identify simple historical concepts in primary or secondary sources.” Only 13% scored at or above proficient in history. On the civics exam‚ students also fared poorly‚ with only 22% of American eighth grade students scoring at or above the proficient level. Government-run schooling also isn’t necessary to produce an educated and civic-minded citizenry‚ since private schools produce superior results‚ we wrote: As Patrick Wolf of the University of Arkansas has documented‚ the research literature on the effects of school choice policies on civic outcomes show an overwhelming advantage for school-choice policies over government-schooling. These findings include studies of the effects of different types of schooling on political tolerance‚ political participation‚ civic knowledge and skills‚ and voluntarism and social capital. Of the 93 findings regarding the effects on civic outcomes‚ 60% show a statistically significant advantage for school choice‚ while only 3% find an advantage for government-run schooling. About 37% of the findings show no discernable difference. The Partnership for the Future of Learning is formidable because of the coalition’s size‚ organization‚ and funding. Only two things stand in the leftists’ way: American families and the truth. Have an opinion about this article? To sound off‚ please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state. The post The Empire Strikes Back During National School Choice Week appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Let Me Give You an Intelligence Test

Five For Fighting's John Ondrasik: We Are Not Okay

On Wednesday's The Source‚ CNN host Kaitlan Collins demonstrated that the liberal news network is still showing a double standard in aggressively fact-checking Republicans while still allowing Democrats to peddle misinformation. Even though CNN shows have been aggressive in calling out GOP presidential candidate Nikki Haley for claiming that the U.S. has "never" been a racist country‚ CNN contributor Ashley Allison was allowed to wrongly claim that Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is "trying to erase black history" from schools even though this claim is demonstrably false. She even asserted that Donald Trump was to blame for an increase in hate crimes against Asian Americans. During a discussion of race-related comments made recently by DeSantis as well as presidential contenders Nikki Haley and Donald Trump‚ Collins showed a couple of soundbites by DeSantis and Haley. After Allison brought up Haley's comments‚ Collins responded: "I'm glad you brought that up because that's a moment that stood out to me on the campaign trail‚ too. It's not just Nikki Haley who -- she went out of her way -- we brought this up and showed it in a Fox News interview -- but Ron DeSantis was asked by Wolf about it. This is what they both said." Then came a clip of Fox News anchor Brian Kilmeade interviewing Haley‚ with the GOP candidate declaring: "We're not a racist country‚ Brian. We've never been a racist country. (editing jump) I faced racism when I was growing up‚ but I can tell you‚ today it's a lot better than it was then." Then came a clip of DeSantis from CNN Tuesday evening: "The U.S. is not a racist country‚ and we've overcome things in our history. (editing jump) And I think the Republican party stands for merit and achievement and colorblindness. That is what we should stand for." After former Republican strategist Lee Carter gave a defense of how Republican candidates discuss race issues‚ Allison went after DeSantis: But you can't solve a problem if you won't address it‚ and‚ I mean‚ it's (inaudible) hearing it from Ron DeSantis. Ron DeSantis is the leader of the culture wars. He's the person trying to erase black history from the curriculum. And it might be actually why he's dragging so low in the polls is because Americans understand the history of our country‚ and they don't want that kind of divisive politics. So I'm not surprised with the three of them and the way they're taking it‚ but it's not a winning strategy for the general‚ and it's undermining a lot of the populations that they're going to need to support them. Collins had no problem with her liberal guest claiming that the Florida governor was trying to "erase" black history as the CNN host merely wrapped up the segment. Why is attacking DeSantis not a "kind of divisive politics"? Allison -- who used to be an advisor in the Obama White House -- also claimed earlier without evidence that President Trump caused an increase in Asians being attacked during the pandemic in spite of no evidence linking the two. Transcript follows: CNN's The Source January 17‚ 2024 9:52 p.m. Eastern ASHLEY ALLISON‚ CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well‚ I think he's playing into misogyny and racism with his comments which is not a foreign construct to Donald Trump. You just mentioned what he did to Donna -- or to President Obama and Vice President Harris‚ and not not to mention all the policies that he had during his administration‚ starting with the Muslim ban‚ and separating immigrants from mother and children‚ or‚ you know‚ using derogatory language to talk about COVID‚ which led to a spike in hate crimes towards Asian American individuals. He is not new to waging war almost against "the other‚" and it is something that his supporters like‚ and the question is: Why? Because Donald Trump is playing to a fear for a lot of white Americans right now to say‚ like‚ "We want to make America great again‚ and make this our country again." Which is why it's so frustrating that when Nikki Haley had an opportunity to be tough and actually call him out this weekend on the history of our country‚ she totally cowered to the base of his party saying. "The country was never racist -- my party is not racist‚" when the leader of your party is literally using a racist undertone by calling you by your name that you don't even go by because of racial undertones. KAITLAN COLLINS: I'm glad you brought that up because that's a moment that stood out to me on the campaign trail‚ too. It's not just Nikki Haley who -- she went out of her way -- we brought this up and showed it in a Fox News interview -- but Ron DeSantis was asked by Wolf about it. This is what they both said. NIKKI HALEY (from Fox News interview with host Brian Kilmeade): We're not a racist country‚ Brian. We've never been a racist country. (editing jump) I faced racism when I was growing up‚ but I can tell you‚ today it's a lot better than it was then. RON DeSANTIS (from CNN forum with Wolf Blitzer): The U.S. is not a racist country‚ and we've overcome things in our history. (editing jump) And I think the Republican party stands for merit and achievement and colorblindness. That is what we should stand for. COLLINS: What do you make of those two answers? Two very different answers‚ I should say. LEE CARTER‚ FORMER REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: They're very‚ very different answers‚ but I think one of the things that has happened‚ right‚ is Republicans have taken so many -- taken so many hits for being the racist party‚ so I think they -- whenever they can‚ they deflect it. And think there's reasons why -- and you're talking about the reasons why the Republicans have been called the racist party‚ but they will just deflect it and push it away because they want no association with that because to them -- to them and to the Republicans -- they're not racist. The don't believe that we're a racist country. They know that there's work to be done‚ but they don't believe that we are a racist country‚ and they don't want to be labeled as such. ALLISON: But you can't solve a problem if you won't address it‚ and‚ I mean‚ it's (inaudible) hearing it from Ron DeSantis. Ron DeSantis is the leader of the culture wars. He's the person trying to erase black history from the curriculum. And it might be actually why he's dragging so low in the polls is because Americans understand the history of our country‚ and they don't want that kind of divisive politics. So I'm not surprised with the three of them and the way they're taking it‚ but it's not a winning strategy for the general‚ and it's undermining a lot of the populations that they're going to need to support them. COLLINS: Ashley Allison‚ Lee Carter‚ thank you both.

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich appeared on Fox News Monday night as Iowa voters caucused and delivered a decisive victory for Donald Trump in his quest to win the Republican presidential nomination and a second term as president. Gingrich joyfully predicted that Trump would not only win the nomination but would win the White House in November with a minimum of 29 states. Gingrich may be right‚ but voter turnout in Iowa was down from four years ago and the lowest in more than a decade. Sub-zero temperatures were likely a contributing factor‚ as might a view by some that Trump had the race in the bag so why go out in freezing conditions? It is also a caution to recall that not every GOP winner of the Iowa caucuses in recent years has won their respective party’s nomination. In his victory remarks‚ Trump displayed a rarely seen quality – kindness and praise of his opponents Ron DeSantis‚ Nikki Haley and Vivek Ramaswamy. Following the vote count‚ Ramaswamy announced his withdrawal from the campaign and support for Trump. Trump‚ who has trafficked in division and name-calling for years‚ suddenly called for unity in a low- key (for him) victory speech. Establishment pundits remain shocked over Trump’s continued appeal to a large swath of voters‚ including an uptick in support among Blacks and Hispanics. People may have short memories but four years isn’t that long ago when one considers gas prices and mortgage rates were lower during the Trump presidency‚ the U.S. was not involved in foreign wars‚ inflation was down‚ and migrants weren’t flooding over our border in record numbers. It isn’t difficult to understand the reasons Trump continues to have a firm grip on his supporters‚ despite his rhetoric and legal challenges. They include an establishment that has refused to acknowledge the anger felt by many Americans over a dysfunctional Congress‚ the $34 trillion debt‚ and the constant bickering among politicians‚ though it is largely the fault of we who elect them. They see unequal justice‚ political agendas instead of addressing the real concerns of voters and what they believe is persecution of Trump by liberal Democrats. Add to the list of outrages felt by Trump supporters who see unequal treatment in th e handling of Hunter Biden’s tax issues and in Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’ hiring of special prosecutor Nathan Wade with whom she has been rumored (by the Trump camp) to have had an affair. Willis has vehemently denied the accusation and showed up in an Atlanta church to blame racism for the criticism directed at her. In an extraordinary statement‚ Gingrich said: “Trump is not a candidate. Trump is the leader of a nationwide movement to take back power from the Establishment.” If that sounds like hyperbole‚ consider the number of states that have approved a convention of states to invoke Article 5 of the Constitution with the goal of enacting term limits and a requirement for a balanced federal budget. That would be 19 states‚ according to the Convention of States website with other states either having passed the resolution in one legislative chamber or are considering it. Thirty-eight states are needed. A Trump victory might encourage more states to sign on. Instead of dwelling on Trump’s personality‚ Washington politicians and the media ought to be examining the reasons behind voter anger and desire to move the country in a different direction. That’s what Trump is promising. It is the reason he won big in Iowa and may run the table in every other primary state.

While much of the questions during Friday afternoon’s White House press briefing centered on the Middle East‚ abortion‚ and Ukraine‚ Fox’s Jacqui Heinrich stuck to the border and got the ever-inept Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre to play dumb on a basic question: does the White House think the border is secure? She arrived at that direction question by way of a recent House resolution: “What is the administration’s response to the 14 House Democrats who voted with Republicans the other day to denounce the ‘open border policies of the Biden administration’?”     Jean-Pierre expressed befuddlement‚ so Heinrich restated: “Would you have a response to 14 Democrats in the House believing that this President has open-border policies?” The Press Secretary then decided to offer up an answer‚ insisting the White House has “been very clear” about “want[ing] to deal with...the border” and has been evidenced by “conversations‚ these negotiations in the Senate with Republicans and Democrats” (even though it’s a group of senators who decided to band together) and Biden’s supplemental funding request (i.e. throw money at it). Among the many possible statements and exasperating one could make at hearing this‚ here’s one fact/question: If it’s so porous‚ why wasn’t the administration able to “deal with” it when their party also controlled Congress? This led Heinrich to ask what should have been a yes or no question: “Is it — is it still the position of the administration that the border is secure?” Like her predecessor Jen Psaki refused to call it a crisis‚ Jean-Pierre ducked what’s objectively a resounding no: “Our position is that we need to do more at the border. We have to do more at the border. That’s why these negotiations are currently happening. That’s our position.” Heinrich used the reminder of her time to ask whether “the administration” sees “the efforts to impeach Secretary Mayorkas” as “unconstitutional.” Of course‚ Jean-Pierre was somehow unprepared and instead blabbered about “shameful” “House Republicans...playing political games” and “not doing their jobs — the jobs that the American people want them to be doing” as evidenced by “the midterms in 2022.” Heinrich knew she didn’t get an answer‚ so she kept pressing (click “expand”): HEINRICH: On the constitutionality portion‚ though‚ I saw that there was a memo that came out that was touting this open letter from constitutional law professors making the argument that impeachment based on policy disagreements is unconstitutional. Is that the approach the administration is taking to this? JEAN-PIERRE: What letter are you speaking to? Say more. HEINRICH: There’s an Ian Sams memo that went out and it was included — an open letter from constitutional law professors who were arguing that impeaching a cabinet official on the basis of policy disagreements is forbidden in the Constitution. JEAN-PIERRE: Well‚ I’m going to let my colleague’s letter stand of itself. I’ve been very clear on how we feel and what we think about these impeachment proceedings and a proceeding that is not even allow Secretary Mayorkas to testify. Eventually‚ after yet another ask‚ Jean-Pierre punted to Sams‚ who responded to a video tweet of this exchange on X‚ posted by this author. Rewind to the John Kirby portion of the briefing and the Daily Caller’s Reagan Reese had a short but important foreign policy question: “President Biden admitted yesterday that the retaliatory strikes against the Houthis aren’t working. Why aren’t they afraid of the U.S.?” Kirby more or less shrugged‚ saying she’d have to find out from “the Houthis what’s in their mindset” because while they’ve falsely asserted their attacks on U.S. ships and commercial vessels in the Red Sea are “about Gaza” and U.S. and Britain “wag[ing] war on them.” “We’re trying to defend our navy ships and sailors....and‚ two‚ protect international shipping. This is about self-defense...[T]he exchange of fire...doesn’t have to go on one day more if the Houthis would make the right decision‚” he added. Reese followed up: “But they’re a terrorist group attacking U.S. interests‚ you know‚ wouldn’t your response make them stop?” Kirby again punted seeing as how “terrorists groups commit acts of violence...for political posturing or political messaging...or‚ perhaps‚ tied to religious fervor.” He also pushed back on the idea of halting the retaliatory strikes: “I don’t know what the alternative would be. Should we just stop? Stop defending ships and just let them have their way with the southern Red Sea? I don’t think that’s in anybody’s interest.” To see the relevant transcript from the January 19 briefing‚ click “expand.” White House press briefing [via ABC News Live subfeed] January 19‚ 2023 2:25 p.m. Eastern REAGAN REESE: President Biden admitted yesterday that the retaliatory strikes against the Houthis aren’t working. Why aren’t they afraid of the U.S.? JOHN KIRBY: Well‚ you have to ask the Houthis what’s in their mindset. I’m going to get in-between the ears of Houthi leaders. They claim it’s about Gaza. It’s not. They claim that this is some sort of‚ you know‚ U.S. and Britain effort to wage war on them. It’s not. We’re simply trying to do two things. We’re trying to defend our navy ships and sailors. And the navy ships and sailors of other nations that are in the Red Sea with us. And‚ two‚ protect international shipping. This is about self-defense. And‚ again‚ this conflict — well‚ first of all‚ we don’t seek a conflict. There doesn’t need to be conflict. But the exchange of fire that we have seen in recent days doesn’t have to go on one day more if the Houthis would make the right decision to these attacks. REESE: They’re a terrorist group attacking U.S. interests‚ you know‚ wouldn’t your make them stop? KIRBY: Again‚ terrorists groups commit acts of violence‚ oftentimes not just for the sake of committing acts of violence‚ but for — for political posturing or political messaging of some sort — or‚ perhaps‚ tied to religious fervor. And‚ they are a designated terrorist group. They are conducting terrorist attacks on shipping in the Red Sea and we have to respond to that. I don’t know what the alternative would be. Should we just stop? Stop defending ships and just let them have their way with the southern Red Sea? I don’t think that’s in anybody’s interest‚ so we’re not going to — we’re not just going to lie down here and — and wait for them to come to a different approach. They need to stop the attacks. If they don’t‚ we’ll continue to defend ourselves and make it harder for them to conduct them. (....) 2:40 p.m. Eastern JACQUI HEINRICH: What is the administration’s response to the 14 House Democrats who voted with Republicans the other day to denounce the “open border policies of the Biden administration”? KARINE JEAN-PIERRE: I — what do you mean? What’s our — our comments on — what? HEINRICH: Would you have a response to 14 Democrats in the House believing that this President —                      JEAN-PIERRE: Oh the [inaudible]. HEINRICH: — has open-border policies? JEAN-PIERRE: Well‚ look‚ we’ve been very clear. We want to deal with what’s going on at the border. That’s why we’re having these conversations‚ these negotiations in the Senate with Republicans and Democrats. The President understands that this is an issue that matters to the American people and we feel like those conversations that are happening — those negotiations are heading in the right direction. And‚ so‚ the President understands. He put the border security — right — there — that was part of the supplement. His request on funding for border security was part of that national security ask — that emergency ask. So‚ we believe we need to do more. The President understands we need to do more and we — we Republicans and Democrats in Senate want to do more. HEINRICH: Is it — is it still the position of the administration that the border is secure? JEAN-PIERRE: Our position is that we need to do more at the border. We have to do more at the border. That’s why these negotiations are currently happening. That’s our position. HEINRICH: And‚ is it the position of the administration that the efforts to impeach Secretary Mayorkas are unconstitutional? JEAN-PIERRE: What we believe is that what House Republicans are doing is playing political games. That’s what we believe. And they’re not doing their jobs — the jobs that the American people want them to be doing. And let’s not forget. They won’t even let Secretary Mayorkas even testify. They want to impeach him‚ but they’re not even allowing him to testify. And‚ so‚ it is shameful. That is what we believe. It is shameful and what we’d encourage these House Republicans to do and this is something we saw coming out of the midterms in 2022. American people want to see Republicans and Democrats working together to deliver for them‚ to address the issues that matter. That’s what we would rather see. HEINRICH: On the constitutionality portion‚ though‚ I saw that there was a memo that came out that was touting this open letter from constitutional law professors making the argument that impeachment based on policy disagreements is unconstitutional. Is that the approach the administration is taking to this? JEAN-PIERRE: What letter are you speaking to? Say more. HEINRICH: There’s an Ian Sams memo that went out and it was included — an open letter from constitutional law professors who were arguing that impeaching a cabinet official on the basis of policy disagreements is forbidden in the Constitution. JEAN-PIERRE: Well‚ I’m going to let my colleague’s letter stand of itself. I’ve been very clear on how we feel and what we think about these impeachment proceedings and a proceeding that is not even allow Secretary Mayorkas to testify. HEINRICH: I’m just trying to gather though‚ because it came to us from‚ you know‚ the White House‚ obviously — JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah. HEINRICH: — that‚ you know‚ is this something that the administration is going to fight in court on the — on a constitutional basis that this is not something that could happen. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah. And I will say I’m going to let my White House colleagues at the counsel — counsel’s office respond to that.

The CEO of an organization funded by leftist billionaire George Soros went to Davos to whine that some U.S. government censorship actions have been restricted. During the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Davos 2024 conference‚ Center for Democracy and Technology CEO Alexandra Reeve Givens pushed for increased censorship of free speech and fear-mongered about “AI-generated misinformation‚” as reported by Reclaim the Net. Givens even specifically cited her Center’s work with election officials to boost only sources of which she approves and censor other voices‚ potentially an endorsement of election interference. Such actions seemed unsurprising given her Center’s funding from George Soros’ Open Society Foundations (OSF). After praising the Biden administration and whining that the majority of election officials don’t search for information from government websites‚ she endorsed “legislation and regulation” to address supposed misinformation. “So in the United States‚ for example‚ right now we have congressional investigations and lawsuits against people that study misinformation about elections on social media platforms‚” Givens said. She then cited the circuit court restrictions on government censorship activities.  “There is currently an injunction in place stopping the Biden administration from communicating with social media platforms about interference threats on the topics of elections that’s actually going before the United States Supreme Court this year‚” she mourned. Givens slammed the pro-free speech injunction‚ totally ignoring the fact that the Constitution protects free speech. “So we’re in this bizarre environment where right as the threats are ticking up‚ the investments in actually doing the day-to-day work of online trust and safety for our information environment is being scaled back and is under attack‚” she griped. Specifically for artificial intelligence‚ Givens had recommendations for labeling content and other censorship policies. She gloomily noted that some social media is decreasing its investment in censorship‚ or would she called trust and safety‚ around elections. After the 2016 election of Donald Trump‚ social media companies learned to track alleged “misinformation”‚ Givens noted‚ and this must continue despite lawsuits and Congressional scrutiny. Such anti-free speech rhetoric is likely to please Soros. OSF gave the Center for Democracy and Technology $836‚000 in grants between 2016 and 2022‚ per the OSF website. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency and an equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored‚ contact us at the Media Research Center contact form‚ and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis‚ who’s leading the prosecution against Donald Trump in Georgia‚ has found herself in deep trouble after she was accused of hiring a romantic partner‚ a married man named Nathan Wade‚ to prosecute Trump. Willis was also accused of accompanying Wade on lavish vacations allegedly funded by taxpayer dollars and for financially benefiting from the affair. Now the already complicated situation has escalated‚ as Willis is now threatening legal action against Wade’s wife‚ Joycelyn Wade‚ for attempting to “harass and embarrass” her as well as “obstruct and interfere” in the election interference case by citing the affair in the couple’s divorce proceedings. Willis’ response to the allegations‚ which Stu Burgiuere calls “bizarre” and “immediately defensive‚” has been to claim that she and Wade just shared “a friendship” and that she “pays all of [the lawyers] equally.” “It came out that actually [Wade] was making‚ I think‚ $250 an hour‚ and the guy who actually wrote the statute that they're using to go after Trump is getting paid $150 an hour‚” Stu tells Glenn Beck. When this information came out‚ Willis immediately went to “a black church to give a speech about racism against black women” and claimed that people “can't hold [black women] to this high standard [of perfection].” Having an affair “is not against the law‚” says Glenn‚ but “hiring this guy and ... paying him more than the other experts” as well as “not going through the proper channels to make sure he's vetted for that job — that is a problem.” “This is going to be a catastrophe‚ and it makes you almost optimistic for Donald Trump's future‚” says Stu. To hear the full conversation‚ watch the clip below. 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.

"Achieving equity" among students may "require unequal distribution of resources and services‚" according to a Milwaukee Public Schools memo Young America's Foundation obtained.What are the details?The overarching theme of the 33-page memo is student discipline "disproportionality‚" and the document also includes directives on anti-racism‚ equity‚ and "whiteness."One section on page 25 of the memo reads: “Whiteness is everywhere around us. Educational practices have been rooted in whiteness and coming from a lens of whiteness for years. Educators should reflect on which elements of whiteness they see in education‚ which they participate in‚ and which elements they can work to dismantle."That same page suggests staff ask themselves‚ "How is your world view and practices within education centered in whiteness? What racists [sic] beliefs have you internalized? What are specific steps we can take to de-center whiteness in our educational practices?"A section on "equity" on page 7 makes sure to distinguish between "equality" and "equity‚" noting the former means "uniform distribution of district resources‚ supports‚ and opportunities" and the latter means "allocation of district resources‚ supports‚ and opportunities that is based on the needs of students and staff."The section goes on to say that "achieving equity may require an unequal distribution of resources and services in order to ensure that all children have an equal opportunity to a free and appropriate public education."A list of resources on page 26 links to a nearly 27-minute video titled “Whiteness: WTF? White Privilege and the Invisible Race."YAF said it's unclear how widely the memo was distributed and that it reached out to Milwaukee Public Schools in regard to the memo."What Milwaukee Public Schools are promoting is yet another example of a concentrated effort to eliminate a merit-based system and replace it with one that is focused on race‚" Jasmyn Jordan‚ national chairwoman of YAF‚ told Fox News. "DEI is fundamentally against everything the left claims to stand for — it is the opposite of racial equality and inclusion."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A former American Airlines flight attendant is accused of secretly recording several underage girls inside the bathrooms of planes he was working aboard. The victims of the alleged covert recordings were as young as 7 years old‚ according to authorities. Estes Carter Thompson III‚ 36‚ was arrested on Thursday in Lynchburg‚ Virginia.Thompson was charged with one count of attempted sexual exploitation of children and one count of possession of child pornography depicting a prepubescent minor. Thompson will later be transferred to Boston to appear in federal court. Thompson is accused of recording videos of at least five underage girls while they were inside the bathroom during American Airlines flights. The now-former American Airlines flight attendant was allegedly busted by a 14-year-old girl who purportedly discovered the hidden phone inside the plane's bathroom in September. As Blaze News previously reported‚ a family was traveling on Sept. 2‚ 2023‚ from Charlotte‚ North Carolina‚ to Boston‚ Massachusetts.A 14-year-old girl sitting in coach went to use the bathroom‚ but it was occupied. Thompson reportedly approached the minor and informed her that the lavatory in first-class was available. The flight attendant allegedly escorted the girl to the first-class bathroom but reportedly told her that he needed to wash his hands before she used the facilities. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts said on Thursday‚ "It is alleged that‚ after Thompson exited the lavatory‚ the minor victim entered and observed red stickers on the underside of the toilet seat lid‚ which was in the open position‚ that stated‚ 'INOPERATIVE CATERING EQUIPMENT' and 'REMOVE FROM SERVICE‚' and 'SEAT BROKEN' was hand-written in black ink on one of the stickers. It is alleged that‚ beneath the red stickers‚ Thompson had concealed his iPhone to record a video."The teen reportedly entered the bathroom‚ noticed the concealed iPhone‚ and used her cell phone to take photos of the suspicious situation.Thompson immediately re-entered the lavatory after the girl exited‚ according to authorities. She returned to her seat and informed her parents of the hidden phone in the bathroom‚ according to charging documents. The alleged victim's parents reported the incident to other members of the flight crew‚ who then notified the pilot. The pilot reported the accusations to law enforcement. Court documents said the teenager's father confronted Thomspon‚ who then retreated to the lavatory with his iPhone for three to five minutes before the plane began to descend. After the American Airlines plane touched down at Logan Airport in Boston‚ law enforcement said Thompson's iPhone may have been restored to factory settings. Authorities then searched Thompson's suitcase and reportedly discovered 11 stickers that read “INOPERATIVE CATERING EQUIPMENT” – like those alleged to be in the airplane bathroom. A subsequent search of Thompson's iCloud account found videos of underage girls using airplane bathrooms on American Airlines flights between January and August 2023‚ court docs stated. Prosecutors claimed the other alleged victims were ages 7‚ 9‚ 11‚ and 14. The alleged victims had been identified and their families were contacted by law enforcement. USA Today reported‚ "The search also uncovered hundreds of images depicting child sexual abuse that had been generated by artificial intelligence‚ as well as more than 50 images of a 9-year-old girl who flew as an unaccompanied minor on an American Airlines flight‚ some of which Thompson took close up as she was sleeping‚ according to the complaint."Following Thompson's arrest‚ American Airlines stressed that it takes "these allegations very seriously" and does not "reflect our airline or our core mission of caring for people.""We have been fully cooperating with law enforcement in its investigation as there is nothing more important than the safety and security of our customers and team‚" the airline said in a statement. American Airlines said that the company fired Thompson in September. “Today‚ the FBI arrested Estes Carter Thompson III after he repeatedly targeted unsuspecting children to sexually exploit them for his own gratification. What Mr. Thompson is accused of doing is disgraceful‚ and we believe‚ calculated‚ given that this alleged conduct occurred on at least five flights‚” said Jodi Cohen — special agent in charge of the FBI's Boston field office. "This case should make it crystal clear that the FBI takes crimes aboard aircraft and the sexual exploitation of children seriously‚" Cohen added. "If you’ve been the victim of a crime aboard an aircraft or have witnessed one take place‚ we ask you to report it to both your flight crew and the FBI.”U.S. Attorney Joshua Levy said‚ "The deeply disturbing conduct alleged here is something no parent or child should ever have to worry about when they travel. Mr. Thompson allegedly used his position to prey on and surreptitiously record innocent children‚ including unaccompanied minors‚ while in a vulnerable state aboard flights he was working."The family of the 14-year-old girl sued American Airlines in December for not immediately confiscating Thompson's phone‚ which they claim allowed him to potentially “destroy evidence."The family’s attorney‚ Paul Llewellyn‚ told the New York Post on Thursday‚ "It is also shocking to hear that he allegedly preyed on at least five minors while they were flying on American. While the criminal justice system must now run its course against the flight attendant‚ it remains to be seen whether American will finally take some measure of responsibility to the families for what happened. This should never have been allowed to happen and must never happen again.”Thompson faces up to 30 years in prison if found guilty of attempted sexual exploitation of children and up to 20 years behind bars if convicted on the child pornography possession charge. Flight attendant arrested for recording kids www.youtube.com Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!