Jesse Watters had fascinating information on his show last night.  He said the Secret Service agent who fired at the would-be assassin Ryan Routh missed all six shots from five feet away. If that’s true, what are we to make of it since agents have to be expert shots? There is also information about all […] The post Agent Who Shot at Trump Assassin 6 Times Missed from Only 5 Ft! appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

President-elect Donald Trump’s incoming border czar Tom Homan met with New York City Democratic Mayor Eric Adams on Thursday where the two agreed on a key part of Trump’s plan for mass deportations. During the meeting — which was held at Gracie Mansion, the official residence of the New York City mayor — Adams and Homan agreed on the urgency of removing illegal immigrant criminals from America’s largest city, according to the mayor. The meeting came after Homan warned sanctuary cities, such as New York and Chicago, about releasing illegal immigrants back onto the street after they commit a crime. At a press conference following the meeting, Adams admitted that New York City “made terrible mistakes in the past” by allowing violent illegal immigrants, “particularly these dangerous gangs,” to remain on the street. “We’re not going to continue in that direction,” the mayor added. Adams said that the city will “protect the rights of immigrants … that are hardworking, giving back to the city in a real way,” but he added, “We’re not going to be a safe haven for those who commit repeated violent crimes against innocent migrants, immigrants, and longstanding New Yorkers.” “That’s was my conversation today with the border czar — to figure out how do we go after those individuals who are repeatedly committing crimes in our city,” he said. The mayor reiterated that NYC “will not be a safe haven for those who commit violent acts. We don’t do it for those who are citizens, and we won’t do it for those who are undocumented.” Adams then blasted reporters, saying that he would take their questions, but adding, “It’s not going to matter what I respond to anyway, you have your preconceived thoughts already.” CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE NYC is still a “sanctuary city” — which prohibits local authorities from working with federal immigration agents to deport illegal immigrants — but Adams is considering an executive order that would undo that status, the New York Post reported. Adams raised concerns about the illegal immigration crisis last year and criticized the Biden administration’s policies that have led to a record number of migrants crossing the southern border. Adams concluded the press conference, saying, “Everyone in this city should be protected. They should not be the victims of violent crimes, and that was the conversation I had with the border czar. We shared that same belief and we’re going to pursue that same belief, and I look forward to that pursuit.”

Rep. Dan Crenshaw of Texas is investigating how much taxpayer money is spent on sex change treatments for minors. Crenshaw wrote a letter to the Congressional Budget Office on Thursday asking for a review of federal programs that allocate funds toward sex-change treatments and operations from therapy to surgery. “Cosmetic self-harm for minors is not medicine. Children’s hospitals offering gender-transition procedures should be stripped of their federal funding. To eliminate support, we must first expose the full extent of government complicity in this ideological fantasy, paving the way to cut it during budget reconciliation next Congress.” Crenshaw said in a statement. The congressman’s letter requested data on the “total aggregate dollar amount spent to fund ‘gender transition procedures’ during Fiscal Years 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023, including a breakdown by year and by each federal program (e.g. Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program) that distributed funds to medical institutions performing ‘gender transition procedures’ on minors during Fiscal Years 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023.” He also asked for a breakdown of the growth of the funding directed toward sex change treatments. Last year, Crenshaw introduced legislation to block taxpayer funds from going to hospitals and treatment centers that offer sex-change treatments for minors. He added the provision to a reauthorization of the Children’s Hospital Graduate Medical Education Payment Program. Crenshaw’s legislation has yet to receive a vote on the House floor. CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE “‘Gender affirming care’ for minors is indistinguishable from child abuse, and it is quickly becoming the human rights issue of our time. There is no other human rights atrocity in America that is so quickly gaining momentum and validation within the very institutions that should know better,” Crenshaw said in a statement to The Daily Wire at the time. “One of these institutions is children’s hospitals. In a place where ‘do no harm’ is the ultimate guiding principle, there is no excuse to ever perform treatments that permanently alter a child’s physiology,” he continued. “From now on, we will not allow a dime of taxpayer funding to go toward children’s hospitals that cater to the harmful pseudoscience that is ‘gender affirming care.’”

You may have seen that Donald Trump rang the opening bell at the New York Stock Exchange today. And as far as ceremonial events in the lead-up to the inauguration, it’s a pretty big one. It’s a moment that highlights why the markets have been through the roof since Election Day. The incoming administration is giving investors a lot of hope because, in contrast to Kamala Harris — who wanted to tax the markets in unprecedented ways until they were completely destroyed — Trump wants less taxes, less regulation and less corrupt oversight from the Securities and Exchange Commission, which lately has become proficient at hassling Elon Musk over his political opinions. But the New York Stock Exchange isn’t the only stock exchange where conservatives are taking a well-deserved victory lap today. Over at the NASDAQ, where the nation’s biggest technology companies are traded, yet another crushing blow was just dealt to so-called diversity, equity and inclusion practices, or DEI. This has been a year full of setbacks to the entire DEI industry, which I’ll recap in just a second. But what just happened at the NASDAQ deserves some explanation, because most people aren’t aware of what happened, even though it’s one of the most significant developments in the financial industry in recent years. Let’s start at the beginning of the timeline. After George Floyd’s fateful overdose, the leaders of the NASDAQ decided that they needed to take decisive action. They believed that, if only the NASDAQ had different rules and regulations, George Floyd never would’ve spent his entire life committing violent felonies, robbing stores and resisting arrest. George Floyd would have been a wealthy stockbroker, if not for the lack of DEI in the financial industry. To that end, the CEO of NASDAQ went on CNBC and began promoting the idea of mandatory DEI disclosure rules for every company that was listed on the exchange. If companies didn’t comply with these rules, they would be delisted entirely, and their company would probably collapse. So what did these DEI disclosure rules entail? Here’s the CEO of NASDAQ with the explanation. This is from late 2020, just a few months into the George Floyd hysteria. Watch: So the idea is that every company that’s listed on the NASDAQ — which amounts to several thousand companies, including Apple, Google, Amazon, and so on — has to publish a DEI report every year. And this report requires one of two things. The first option is for companies to state in their report that they have two members on their board of directors from an “underrepresented group,” including at least one female and, in addition to the female, one person who, “identifies as Black, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, Alaskan Native, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, biracial, or LGBTQ+.” Alternatively, companies have the option of explaining in their reports why they didn’t meet the requirement. They have to publicly provide an explanation as to why they didn’t meet NASDAQ’s quota, which of course is intended to subject these companies to accusations of racism, bigotry and so on. WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show This is coercion, obviously. It’s also unconstitutional and extremely, comically arbitrary. For some reason, NASDAQ demands that company’s have a “female” on the board (although they can’t define the word). That’s a must-have. If you don’t have a female on the board, then you can’t pass Go, and you can’t collect your $200. But at the same time, NASDAQ isn’t insistent on having, say, a gay guy on the board. That’s not too important to them. If you have a Pacific Islander, that’s good enough. That basically counts as a gay guy, in NASDAQ’s eyes. All of the ethnic minority groups are interchangeable. Just pick one at random and you’re fine. Go grab an Alaskan native from the bargain bin. If you can’t find one, see if there are a couple of Native Americans on the clearance rack. That seems to be the attitude. Later on in the same interview, the NASDAQ CEO decides to drop the pretense that this rule is about “disclosure.” She all but admits that the point is to strong-arm companies into making diversity hires. Watch: So, she repeats the debunked McKinsey study about how “diversity” supposedly makes companies more money, which is a complete fraud. We’ve talked about that before. McKinsey never found that DEI makes companies more money. They actually found that companies with a lot of money tend to practice DEI, which just proves that when companies have a lot of excess money lying around, they tend to waste it. So, saying that DEI makes companies money because successful companies have DEI is like saying that owning a Ferrari makes you money because people with lots of money own Ferraris. But the important part of that clip is how the NASDAQ CEO admits that there’s been more than a decade of thinking about, “how can we bring more diversity on boards.” That’s their intent. And they finally decided on this course of action. They’re going to publicly shame companies that try to select board members on the basis of merit, instead of race and gender. The rule went into effect shortly after that interview. And it’s been in effect for some time now. Yesterday, however, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which is based in New Orleans, finally put an end to this insanity. They ruled that the Securities and Exchange Commission didn’t have the legal authority to approve this DEI policy. And it’s quite a takedown, to the point that it’s worth going through some of it. Here’s one section of the majority opinion for example: What is the public interest here? Nasdaq [claimed there is an] established link between the racial, gender, and LGTBQ+ identities of a company’s board members and ‘the quality of a company’s financial reporting, internal controls, public disclosures, and management oversight.’ But Nasdaq offered little support for its assertion that there is an empirically established—or even logical—link between the racial, gender, and sexual composition of a company’s board and the quality of its governance. .. Nasdaq offered only the barest speculation to support the proposition that there is any link between investor protection and racial and sexual diversity. In other words, the court did what no one in the corporate media did for the past five years. They actually looked at the studies that supposedly show that DEI helps companies improve their performance. And they found that there’s no evidence at all. This is something that activists in the federal government simply asserted, out of thin air — and then they accused you of being a racist if you disagreed. That tactic used to work. It doesn’t work anymore. There are other reasons the court struck down this rule, as well. One of them is that the SEC is supposed to regulate things like “market manipulation and proxy voting.” They’re not supposed to be involved in forcing DEI mandates and social engineering down everyone’s throat. So they’re wildly overstepping their authority — especially since states, not the federal government, are supposed to have the primary authority to regulate corporations. The only surprising part of this ruling is that it took so long. Initially, when the Fifth Circuit heard this case, they upheld the DEI rule, probably because all three judges on the panel were appointed by Democrat presidents. But two conservative groups — the National Center for Public Policy Research and the Alliance for Fair Board Recruitment — appealed to a full panel of the Fifth Circuit, which ultimately overturned the rule. MATT WALSH’S ‘AM I RACIST?’ NOW STREAMING ON DAILYWIRE+ This is, among other things, a devastating blow to the DEI agenda. It’s a rejection of the federal government’s efforts to force some of the most powerful companies on the planet to practice DEI. It also creates a lot of problems for so-called E.S.G. investing, where major investment firms direct money to companies that practice DEI. These activists recognized that financial incentives are some of the most potent tools they have, in order to force compliance with their agenda. And now they’re losing control over those incentives. And this is just one of the major court victories in the past week concerning DEI. Separately, federal judge Reed O’Connor in Texas just struck down Boeing’s proposed plea deal with the Biden administration, concerning the crashes of those 737 MAX jets a few years ago. The Biden DOJ and Boeing came to an agreement that will allow Boeing to avoid a federal criminal trial for its negligence. And part of that deal involves the appointment of a federal monitor to oversee Boeing, since they appear to struggle with designing planes that don’t try to deliberately crash themselves. But the plea deal had a major problem, which the DOJ and Boeing tried to slip past the judge. It requires that the monitor be selected on the basis of DEI. And the judge threw out the plea deal as a result. He’s not going to tolerate DEI being used when people’s lives are at stake, which in this situation, they clearly are. Watch: When we talked about this case a few weeks ago, it looked like Judge O’Connor was going to toss this plea deal. He grilled lawyers for Boeing and the Biden administration about the provision that the independent monitor should be selected, “‘in keeping with the Department’s commitment to diversity and inclusion.” Specifically, the judge wanted to know whether the government had excluded any candidates based on race or gender. And the lawyers provided inconsistent responses, because they didn’t want to admit that the answer was obviously “yes.” That’s what DEI is. So here’s what O’Connor wrote in his ruling last week: In a case of this magnitude, it is in the utmost interest of justice that the public is confident this monitor selection is done based solely on competency. The parties’ DEI efforts only serve to undermine this confidence in the Government and Boeing’s ethics and anti-fraud efforts. Again, this is a major blow for DEI activists, in both the federal government and in government contractors. Unless they want future programs and plea deals to be held up in court, they’re now on notice that they should get rid of DEI entirely. And already, it’s pretty obvious that Boeing understands that. They’ve recently announced that they’re scrapping their entire DEI department. They’re under new leadership now, and the new CEO has decided — in no uncertain terms — that the whole concept of DEI has been a disaster for the company. In this case, Boeing’s announcement came after the filmmaker Robby Starbuck reached out to the company, vowing to wage a war against their DEI policies. Starbuck has already pushed multiple major corporations — from Jack Daniels to John Deere to Harley Davidson to Walmart to Ford — to gut or eliminate their DEI programs. And apparently Boeing didn’t want their own public shaming. But there’s another important reason why Boeing and other companies are getting rid of DEI, as well. Republicans in Congress are currently advancing the “Dismantle DEI Act,” which will eliminate DEI in the federal government. And crucially, the bill would also ban the federal government from hiring any contractors that practice DEI. In other words, these companies stand to lose billions of dollars if they keep discriminating on the basis of race. For companies like Boeing, which make nearly half of their money from the government, that would be devastating. CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE So they’re getting rid of this nonsense. In other words, Republicans in Congress, for the first time in a while, are generating very positive and very noticeable social change. And Democrats, for their part, can only screech and howl in response. I covered some of their reactions to the bill recently. They know they’re losing. They know they have no argument. That has been the story of DEI in general this year. From states and universities dismantling their DEI programs, to the success of my film “Am I Racist?,” to the crushing defeat of Kamala Harris — the ultimate DEI candidate — it’s very clear that DEI is on its way out. The ideology that was so dominant just a few years ago has now been thoroughly exposed, humiliated, and laughed out of court. Just like BLM and hateful, fraudulent anti-white narratives, DEI has rapidly become irrelevant. Merit, competence and the rule of law are now ascendant. That’s one of the Right’s biggest victories of 2024. And it’s worth celebrating and memorializing, so that we never make the mistake of allowing these corrupt and moronic peddlers of race-hatred to ever hold power again.

The Biden administration staffer behind the pro-Kamala Harris propaganda account “Kamala’s Wins” likely violated federal law, according to an ethics complaint filed by a watchdog group that centers around an October Daily Wire investigation.  The Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust (FACT) on Wednesday filed a complaint against Ethan Wolf, a “communications specialist” in the U.S. Department of Commerce’s International Trade Administration. FACT alleges that Wolf “violated the Hatch Act by running the political X account ‘Kamala’s Wins’ while on duty as a federal government employee.” The Hatch Act bars federal employees from engaging in political activity while on duty or in a federal building. The complaint, which cites The Daily Wire’s October exposé of Wolf and “Kamala’s Wins,” calls on “the Office of Special Counsel to act immediately” and look into Wolf’s apparent violations. READ MORE: Viral Account Pushing Pro-Kamala Misinformation Was Launched By Biden Admin Employee “This is a straightforward case,” FACT Executive Director Kendra Arnold wrote in the complaint, adding that “given the prominence of Wolf’s political account, his political activity could easily be seen as coercive and hostile to other employees.” Wolf first launched his viral account as “Biden’s Wins” in January 2022. At the time, Wolf — a recent college graduate — was working as deputy political director for Illinois Democrat Brad Schneider’s reelection campaign.  “Biden’s Wins” quickly became “a favorite of White House staffers” such as Ron Klain, POLITICO reported in July 2022. In September 2022, Wolf was invited to the White House “for a private briefing” with Biden, Harris, and Klain. A month later, he returned to the White House for another meeting, where he posed for photos with top White House officials and Doug Emhoff. Around a year after launching “Biden’s Wins,” Wolf landed his  $94,000 a year job in the Commerce Department. In July 2024, after Biden withdrew from the presidential ticket, the account was rebranded as “Kamala’s Wins.” The account, which has since been rebranded again as “Democratic Wins Media,” has nearly 738,000 followers as of this writing. The account has been a frequent source of misinformation, falsely claiming that a number of NFL quarterbacks were part of a “White Dudes for Harris” fundraising call. It has also parroted false claims about former President Donald Trump’s involvement with Project 2025 and his 2017 remarks in Charlottesville, Virginia. The account also misconstrued facts about Biden and Harris’s record, claiming their administration’s policies caused inflation and grocery prices to plummet, and led to a reduction in violent crime. Wolf also repeatedly shared political content from his personal X account during work hours, The Daily Wire reported. Wolf insisted in February 2024 that Biden was mentally competent, just five months before a series of embarrassing mental gaffes forced Biden to suspend his presidential campaign. The ethics complaint was first reported by the Free Beacon.

President-elect Donald Trump said in an interview published this week that he has no concerns about any potential conflicts of interest related to Elon Musk leading the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) because Musk loves the U.S. more than his companies. Trump made the remarks in an interview with TIME that was published when the magazine announced that it had named Trump the “Person of the Year.” Trump was asked if Musk advocating for cuts at NASA could constitute a conflict of interest since that could benefit SpaceX, Musk’s space company. “I think that Elon puts the country long before his company,” Trump said. “I mean, he’s in a lot of companies, but he really is, and I’ve seen it. He considers this to be his most important project, and he wanted to do it. And, you know, I think, I think he’s one of the very few people that would have the credibility to do it, but he puts the country before, and I’ve seen it, before he puts his company.” CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE Trump said that cuts were desperately needed to get federal spending under control and to encourage economic growth. “Look, we have a country that is bloated with rules, regulations and with, frankly, people that are unnecessary,” Trump said. “We are going to need a lot of people in a lot of other jobs. We’re looking to get people into private sector jobs where they can do better and be more productive. We’re going to see what happens. We have some interesting months coming up, at the beginning. We’re going to see what happens. But this country is bloated.”

A Wisconsin school denied extra reading help to a white dyslexic student because of his race, according to a conservative legal firm. The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (WILL) said this week that a young boy attending King Elementary School in Green Bay was discriminated against because of a policy that prioritized literacy help to black, Hispanic, and American Indian students. WILL says that the policy, found in its “school success” plan, violates federal civil rights law and should be scrapped. The policy in question details that part of the school’s action plan should be “intentional work educating our focus students, prioritizing additional resources to First Nations, Black, and Hispanic students.” Colbey Decker told WILL that when she attempted to get extra reading help for her son because of his dyslexia, he was put on a waiting list for almost a year before he got help as part of a group. WILL says that Decker’s child would have been given individualized help if he had been black or Hispanic. “The school implied to me that my child would already be receiving one-on-one reading support if he were Black, Hispanic, or First Nation,” Decker said after reaching out to the school’s principal about the policy. “I was speechless. I think we need to help every student in need, and using the guise of ‘diversity’ simply creates more division and hurts all students.” In a letter to the Green Bay Public School District, WILL called for the policy to be ended. “This policy, while purporting to address disparities, discriminates against students of other races who are equally in need of support,” WILL lawyers Cory Brewer and Dan Lennington wrote. “Race is used both as a negative and as a stereotype, in violation of U.S. Supreme Court precedent. The district’s policy fails to treat students as individuals and disregards their unique needs.” Brewer told The Daily Wire that the firm was considering different legal responses to the policy, including filing a lawsuit or federal complaint. She said that the best-case scenario would be that the policy is rescinded and replaced with a colorblind standard that treats every student equally. “The school where our client’s son attends has a written plan that explicitly says additional resources will be prioritized to certain students based on race,” she told The Daily Wire. “Obviously, that means that other students are considered not a priority.” CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE The school district denied that the race-based policy was in place at the district level in a statement to Fox. “The District received the letter from WILL yesterday and we are investigating the allegations. However, we can state unequivocally that the District does not have a policy that includes the language included in the letter,” the district said. “All District policies must be approved by the Board of Education and no such policy language exists.” Brewer told The Daily Wire that she was optimistic that the federal civil rights laws would be able to be applied to similar cases with the incoming Trump administration. “With the Trump administration coming in, we hope to have an opportunity for Title VI to be enforced in a way that ensures all individuals, such as our client’s son, to be treated as individuals and for students who need help to get help without regard to race,” she said.