White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre snapped at a reporter during Friday’s press briefing when confronted about President Joe Biden lying to the American people about pardoning his son, convicted felon Hunter Biden. The exchange came after Biden pardoned his son last week and then took a trip to Africa and Biden’s White House communications team avoided doing on-air press briefings for several days, likely hoping that they would not be asked on camera about their repeated lying to the American public that Biden would not pardon his son. “Zeke asked this question. I just didn’t hear an answer,” CNN’s MJ Lee began. “The next time that the president says he will or won’t do something, why should the American people believe him?” “I answered that question,” Jean-Pierre claimed. “I don’t have anything else to add.” Lee again pressed Jean-Pierre to answer, to which KJP claimed: “I answered the question. I answered the question.” Lee politely asked Jean-Pierre if she could explain it in a way that was understandable for the American public. Jean-Pierre responded by insulting Lee, suggesting that she was not smart enough to understand her response. CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE “I can’t speak to you understanding the question or not or my answer or not on this,” Jean-Pierre snapped back. “I don’t have anything else to say. I’m not gonna re-litigate this. I did this on Monday for 30 minutes. I went back and forth.” She claimed that Biden put out a “really comprehensive” statement explaining his decision to pardon his son for gun crimes, tax crimes, and other crimes that he may have committed. WATCH: CNN’s @MJ_Lee: “Zeke asked this question. I just didn’t hear an answer. The next time that the President says he will or won’t do something, why should the American people believe him?” KJP: “I answered that question. I don’t have anything else to add.” Lee: “Well, what’s your… pic.twitter.com/kA9CY72xCy — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) December 6, 2024

Congress will ban the use of taxpayer funds for gender transition surgeries for children that get their medical care through the military’s healthcare program, according to the text of legislation posted on Saturday evening. This year’s National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) includes language that prohibits coverage under Tricare of transgender procedures that could “result in sterilization” of children. Section 708 of the NDAA states: “Medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria that could result in sterilization may not be provided to a child under the age of 18,” according to a copy of the NDAA viewed by The Daily Wire. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson told The Daily Wire on Saturday that this is a “critical and necessary step” in the fight against “radical gender ideology.” “Taxpayer dollars should never be used to support procedures and treatments that could permanently harm and sterilize young people,” Speaker of the House Mike Johnson told The Daily Wire. “In this year’s NDAA, we’re taking a critical and necessary step to protect the children of American service members from radical gender ideology and experimental drugs.” He further promised: “House Republicans will continue to take action to protect America’s kids.” BREAKING: The TRICARE program, which handles health care for the military, is banning transgender procedures that “could result in sterilization” of children. This is the final language of the NDAA legislation, which was just negotiated by leadership in the Senate & House: pic.twitter.com/C2J9eBk5ON — Mary Margaret Olohan (@MaryMargOlohan) December 8, 2024 The news follows oral arguments heard by the Supreme Court over Tennessee’s law banning transgender procedures for children. Conservatives have rallied around Tennessee, hoping that its law paves the way for other states, or even the federal government, to pass similar laws. Immediately after the hearing, Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS) introduced legislation that would ban doctors from performing life-altering and irreversible transgender procedures on kids across the country. The provision in the NDAA was first slipped into the bill this summer. There was speculation that this would be stripped during negotiations between Republicans and Democrats, but the provision survived and is in the final agreed upon legislation. It appears on page 398 of the nearly 2,000 page piece of legislation, which can be viewed in full here.  

It looks as if the royal family’s life may be returning to normal. The last year has been hard, particularly for Prince George, Princess Charlotte, and Prince Louis as they navigated life with a mother undergoing cancer treatment. Kate Middleton announced in September that her chemo was over, and she would be returning to her royal duties slowly but surely. Among the most anticipated was her fourth annual Together at Christmas carol service. On December 6, Princess Kate and her children attended the event, the young royals’ first public outing as a threesome in six months. Photos of the beautiful event at Westminster Abbey show the royal family ready for Christmas. View this post on Instagram A post shared by The Prince and Princess of Wales (@princeandprincessofwales) Princess Kate And Her Children Were Glowing Quite literally, the family held candles and sang carols during the traditional event. William and Kate shared images of the happy family on their official Instagram. The caption reads, “An evening to come together and celebrate this festive season as the Together at Christmas Carol Service returns to Westminster Abbey. Shining a light on individuals from all over the UK who have shown love, kindness, and empathy towards others in their communities.” Royal enthusiasts loved seeing everyone together again. One wrote, “So beautiful to see this initiative thrive. This whole event screams Catherine in capital letters. I love seeing everyone, from artists to guests to the family enjoying it every year. What a great asset she is to this institution.” This person agreed, “It’s so wonderful to see the whole family together! Looking forward to watching the program! So wonderful to have Catherine back.” Together at Christmas will air in Great Britain on Christmas Eve, so we’ll have to settle for pictures for now. Princess Kate, William, and their children looked like the picture of health and holiday cheer. We hope they have the merriest Christmas yet. This story’s featured image is by photo by AARON CHOWN/POOL/AFP via Getty Images. The post Prince William & Princess Kate’s Children Attend First Public Outing in Six Months appeared first on InspireMore.

Just go away, PETA

A midwife has created a “game-changing” kangaroo-style pouch that promises to upgrade neonatal care for babies delivered by Caesarean Section and improve outcomes for the tiny newborns. Stacey Boyle invented the special top for birth partners to wear during surgery, instead of the normal scrubs. It features a pouch that allows vital skin-to-skin contact to […] The post Midwife Created a Game-Changing Kangaroo Pouch for Babies Born via Caesarean Section appeared first on Good News Network.

Is Joy Reid okay? From the look of things, obviously not. The MSNBC host has built a career on outrage and hyperbole, but her recent antics suggest something far more unhinged. In a bold attempt to deflect criticism over her apparent adoption of President Trump’s signature look, Reid chose to shave her head. Neil deGrasse Tyson wrestled in college; he is intimately familiar with the profound physical differences between the two sexes. She thought this move would silence her critics. Spoiler alert: It didn’t. Instead, it sparked laughter, not at her critics but squarely at her. A middle-aged woman shaving her head in a fit of defiance doesn’t scream empowerment. It screams instability. Turkey terror More recently, Reid released a pre-Thanksgiving video warning that some Americans might not feel "safe" around their MAGA relatives. To bolster her point, she hosted an equally unhinged Yale psychiatrist who suggested that LGBTQ+ individuals should avoid conservative family members entirely. This is not reasonable advice. But reason and Reid are estranged bedfellows. They parted ways many moons ago. The 55-year-old is a case study in what happens when someone builds her platform not on ideas but on the fragile foundation of identity politics and moral posturing. Reid's critics don’t need to discredit her; she does that all on her own. In trying to be everything to everyone on the left, she’s become a caricature of modern media: loud, hollow, and entirely insufferable. Skeletons in her closet Reid frequently lectures viewers on inclusion, tolerance, and justice, casting herself as a champion of the left’s ideals. But, I ask, are her views genuine or merely a theatrical performance? Reid’s relentless grandstanding feels more like an elaborate deflection from her own controversial past — a past that is completely at odds with the persona she now projects. In 2018, when homophobic blog posts from her early career resurfaced, she initially apologized, admitting to some of the commentary. But when more posts emerged, Reid’s story shifted dramatically. Suddenly, she claimed her blog had been hacked years earlier, a defense that crumbled under scrutiny. The notion that a hacker planted posts in real time, matching her public commentary, defied logic. Even her cybersecurity consultant admitted that the evidence failed to support her claims. In other words, Reid was clearly lying. Despite this troubling history, the pundit turned activist has positioned herself as a self-appointed arbiter of morality, eager to denounce others while her own record remains anything but spotless. Of course, it’s possible that she’s undergone a complete transformation and truly become the progressive warrior she now claims to be. But the sheer insanity of her rhetoric suggests something else: specifically, overcompensation. Reid’s crusade against conservatives feels less like conviction and more like a desperate bid to rewrite her narrative, to drown out the sins of her past with louder, more righteous indignation. Beam him up Reid is not alone in her reinvention. Consider Neil deGrasse Tyson. Once a respected figure in science and pop culture, Tyson has devolved into a farcical self-parody. He’s not just woke. He’s hyperwoke. The astrophysicist’s shift from measured reason to full-throated wokeness didn’t happen by accident. In 2019, four women accused him of sexual misconduct, a controversy that could have ended his career (four seems like a lot). Instead of addressing the allegations head-on, Tyson pivoted. Overnight, a man who once prided himself on logic became one of the loudest proponents of the woke agenda, particularly when it came to the most contentious of topics. Yes, that’s right: trans athletes in women’s sports. Tyson, supposedly a man of science, has publicly argued that it’s perfectly acceptable for biological men to compete against actual women. One assumes he doesn’t actually believe this. Tyson wrestled in college; he is intimately familiar with the profound physical differences between the two sexes. The peddler of bad ideas and even worse ties may be many things, but stupid isn’t one of them — though you could be forgiven for thinking otherwise. His recent appearance on "Real Time with Bill Maher" was a master class in self-sabotage. When Maher, who oscillates wildly between bouts of wokeness and moments of clarity, confronted him on the undeniable physical advantages men have over women in sports, Tyson played dumb. Rather than being honest, he leaned on smug quips and feeble attempts at humor. The performance flopped, laying bare not just the weakness of his argument but the pathetic pandering driving it. Spineless signaling Reid and Tyson are two sides of the same coin, figures who have sacrificed authenticity to appease an audience hungry for performative contrition. They are not champions of progress; they are cowards and phonies. Too afraid to stand by their own convictions, they embody the spinelessness that comes with prioritizing approval over integrity. They exemplify self-preservation, willing to say or do whatever it takes to sustain their increasingly meaningless careers. When they look in the mirror, one wonders whether they smile or whether tears of shame silently stream down their cheeks. Only they can answer this. What is indisputable, however, is the fact that both Reid and Tyson have traded integrity for applause, hoping that louder declarations of virtue will obscure their past controversies. It won’t. It can’t. We all see them for what they truly are.

Bill Gates and the World Economic Forum are promoting CRISPR as a game-changing tool in science, but behind the excitement are serious concerns about its risks. For the uninititated, clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats technology is a gene-editing tool that allows for modifications of DNA in living organisms. Recent research reveals that CRISPR, while effective at editing genes to address inherited diseases, often introduces unintended consequences, including large-scale DNA mutations. The potential to 'edit out' undesirable traits raises questions about eugenics and the commodification of human life. This is a major concern. Cascade of genetic malfunctions Editing a specific gene can lead to off-target effects, altering unintended regions of the genome. This can lead to rapid mutations, potentially triggering the onset of cancers or other genetic disorders. Furthermore, even when targeting specific sequences, CRISPR's modifications can destabilize chromosomes, leading to large-scale deletions or rearrangements of genetic material. Such alterations not only disrupt the targeted gene but also affect neighboring regions, causing a cascade of genetic malfunctions. Another critical danger lies in the complexity of biological systems. Genes rarely act in isolation; they interact within vast networks that control development, metabolism, and immunity. Changing one gene can disrupt these networks, creating unforeseen problems. For example, CRISPR has been associated with chromosomal abnormalities that compromise cellular functions. These serious side effects are particularly concerning when CRISPR is applied to human embryos or germline cells. That's because these changes are heritable, potentially affecting future generations. Ethics? What ethics? Ethical concerns further compound the risks. The potential to "edit out" undesirable traits raises questions about eugenics and the commodification of human life. While therapeutic applications aim to eliminate genetic diseases, the same technology could be misused to enhance physical abilities, intelligence, or appearance. This will likely pave the way for a new era of genetic discrimination, where access to CRISPR defines who holds the ultimate biological edge. In Silicon Valley, the seeds of this dystopia are already being sown. Transhumanists champion genetic enhancement as the next step in human evolution, treating biology as a canvas to craft the "perfect" being. We are entering an age in which a privileged few will command an undeniable biological edge. The rest of us, meanwhile, will wither away in the shadows of engineered perfection. Moreover, the technical and regulatory frameworks around CRISPR remain insufficiently robust to address its risks comprehensively. Current regulations vary widely across countries, creating opportunities for unregulated experimentation. Rogue scientists or organizations could exploit CRISPR for malicious purposes, such as developing bioweapons or creating genetically modified organisms with harmful ecological impacts. Civilizational collapse The environmental risks are equally alarming. Releasing genetically edited organisms into the wild could wreak havoc on ecosystems. Take CRISPR-based "gene drives," engineered to spread specific traits rapidly through populations. Touted as a solution to control disease-carrying mosquitoes, they could just as easily trigger species extinctions or unleash ecological chaos if they spiral out of control or jump to unintended species. Imagine a world where CRISPR gene drives are set loose to wipe out malaria — a mission close to Bill Gates’ heart. These gene drives, designed to spread infertility among malaria-carrying mosquitoes, are engineered to wipe out the species within a few generations. At first, it’s a triumph. Mosquito numbers plummet, malaria cases vanish. But then the nightmare really begins. Unbeknownst to scientists, the engineered gene interacts with a natural genetic sequence in a related mosquito species. The gene drive jumps species, infecting mosquitoes vital for pollination in certain ecosystems. As their populations crash, plants reliant on pollination begin to wither. In regions already struggling with food insecurity, farmers watch helplessly as crops fail, sparking famine across entire nations. Meanwhile, predators like bats and birds that feed on mosquitoes face a collapsing food supply and begin to die off, triggering further ecological instability. With fewer bats to control pests, insect populations explode, ravaging crops and spreading new diseases. The ripple effects spiral outward, destabilizing ecosystems and economies far beyond the initial intervention. But the nightmare doesn’t stop there. The gene drive mutates, jumping beyond mosquitoes to other insects, including bees. With pollinators dying off, the global food chain begins to crumble. Fruit orchards, vegetable fields, and wild plants are left barren. Starvation sweeps the globe, and society crumbles into anarchy.Beware of false idols When humans play God with CRISPR, they gamble with the delicate balance of nature shaped over millions of years. These interventions can trigger unpredictable chain reactions. Tinkering with the genetic code of life without grasping its full complexity risks collapsing ecosystems, endangering human health, and wiping out species. Worse, it could unleash resistant pathogens or new genetic disorders that spiral into global catastrophes. This arrogance, the delusional belief that we can outsmart nature, could be humanity’s most catastrophic misstep.

Murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO compared to … 'Breaking Bad'?

Taylor Lorenz Says People Are Celebrating CEO's Murder Because ’It Feels Like a Victory’

Facing Injustice: Daniel Penny Remains 'Optimistic' Even As He Stares Down Possible 4-Year Sentence