Application Denied: Another Dive into the Failures of Military Bureaucracy and COVID-19 Mandate Relief

On September 23, 2021, an active-duty Air Force officer who has served for 18 years submitted a request for a religious accommodation for the COVID-19 shot mandate. Four and a half years later, there is still derogatory paperwork in his personnel file, leaving him ineligible or significantly disadvantaged for all career advancement and more.

This story provides an update on developments from September 2025 and March 2026, reinforcing J.M. Phelps’ assertion that the Board of Correction of Military Records (BCMR) is “ineffective” and frequently highlights the widespread “bureaucratic malfeasance” within the military institution, providing little more than a “half measure” to service members, as in the case of Air Force Captain Anthony Monteleone.

Furthermore, concerning Air Force BCMR (AFBCMR), the situation underscores how their decisions are a direct affront to the goals of President Donald Trump and Department of War (DOW) Pete Hegseth to restore the military.

Case in point: On April 3, 2026, AFBCMR issued a “finding” that flatly denied any relief whatsoever to Capt. Monteleone. Given the overwhelming mountain of evidence reviewed by J.M. Phelps and provided to the Board, one can only conclude that the Board continues to undermine the efforts of President Trump and his appointees within the Department of War. This bureaucratic obstruction appears aimed at continuing the denial of mandated relief to those who suffered under the military’s unlawfully enforced COVID-19 shot mandate, which was rescinded in January 2023.

Mr. Richard Anderson, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Manpower and Reserves, representing the AFBCMR and operating under the full delegated authority of the Secretary of the Air Force, stated that when it comes to Capt. Monteleone’s case, “the [AFBCMR] determined there was insufficient evidence of error or injustice. Accordingly, your application is denied.”

Sadly, for the author of this article, Mr. Anderson’s statement brings to mind the idiom, “If I had a dollar for every time I heard that.”

The Board’s stated reasoning behind this decision was that, although the entire mandate was ruled unlawful, the guidance from Undersecretary of War for Personnel and Readiness, Anthony Tata, to the branch BCMRs did not specifically state that all [emphasis mine] service members harmed by the entire COVID-19 mandate must be granted relief. Instead, in their interpretation [emphasis mine], his guidance indicates that only those punished for solely refusing the order to take the shot itself were eligible for remediation under the guidance.

Keep reading

Yet Another HISTORIC CHURCH TORCHED In Canada

Another historic church lies in ashes after a major fire tore through Saint-Romain, Quebec, last night. The building, whose construction began in 1893, is the latest casualty in a relentless campaign against Canada’s Christian institutions that has seen arsons more than double since 2021.

The post, which included video of the blaze, has ignited widespread outrage across X, with people quick to assume who the likely culprits are.

That CBC News investigation documented the surge in detail. A subsequent Macdonald-Laurier Institute report confirmed arson attacks on religious institutions more than doubled from pre-2021 baselines, with fewer than 4% of cases resulting in charges—leaving over 96% unsolved.

Western nations are watching the same erosion. In the UK, churches face more than 10 crimes every single day.

Keep reading

IMF Cuts Growth Outlook, Warns Iran War Could Push Global Economy to Brink

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) on Tuesday cut its growth outlook and warned the global economy could edge toward recession if the Iran war intensifies, as energy disruptions ripple through inflation, financial markets, and trade.

In its latest World Economic Outlook and accompanying analysis, the IMF said the Middle East conflict—now disrupting a key share of global oil and gas flows—sent previously positive growth momentum to an unexpected halt and introduced unusually high uncertainty for policymakers and investors.

“Downside risks dominate,” IMF analysts wrote in the executive summary. “Geopolitical tensions could worsen even more than they already have—turning the situation into the largest energy crisis in modern times—or domestic political strains could erupt.”

The fund outlined three scenarios—reference, adverse, and severe—depending on how long the war lasts and how deeply energy markets are affected. Under the most severe case, global growth could fall to around 2 percent, a level historically associated with recession-like conditions that has occurred only four times since the 1980s.

“This shock is large. … It is global. Everybody uses energy. Everybody feels the pinch,” IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva said in a recent interview with CBS, noting that up to 13 percent of global oil and 20 percent of gas flows have been disrupted.

“People are hurting.”

Keep reading

Trump’s Iran claims clash with reality on the ground 

There is rarely a day when US President Donald Trump does not command attention on social media, with posts ranging from attacks on public figures to sweeping claims about his own achievements. The same tone has carried into his handling of the war on Iran, where he has repeatedly insisted that US actions have weakened Tehran and decisively shifted the conflict in Washington’s favor.

Those assertions have come under closer scrutiny after Trump announced a US naval blockade of Iranian ports following the collapse of talks on Sunday, warning that any vessel attempting to challenge it would be destroyed.

Yet the reality on the ground appears far less clear: Iran has threatened retaliation, the practicality of enforcing such a blockade remains uncertain, and key allies have shown limited willingness to take part. The contrast underscores a widening gap between Trump’s narrative of progress and a conflict that continues to escalate without a clear resolution.

Keep reading

Europe vs. Russia in a War: Food, Energy, and Logistics Favor Russia

A companion analysis I conducted for The Gateway Pundit examined European versus Russian military capabilities without U.S. support, focusing on direct military hardware such as tanks, aircraft, carriers, submarines, and nuclear weapons.

It found that Russia holds decisive advantages in ground-force experience, armored production, submarine power, Arctic dominance, and tactical nuclear weapons. Europe’s theoretical hardware advantages are undermined by readiness failures, fragmented command, and a complete lack of peer-level conventional warfare experience.

Raw firepower is only part of the equation. Wars are won or lost on the ability to sustain operations over time. That means keeping weapons factories running, fuel flowing, soldiers fed, and supply lines open under fire. On every one of those dimensions, Russia’s position is stronger than Europe’s. In some cases, the gap is not even close.

European defense spending has risen sharply since 2022, but remains structurally insufficient for a peer conflict. At the 2025 NATO Summit in The Hague, allies committed to investing 5 percent of GDP by 2035, with at least 3.5 percent on core defense. Commitments and current reality remain far apart, however. Sixteen European allies barely exceed the 2 percent threshold, spending between 2 and 2.1 percent of GDP in 2025, and only Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland are projected to reach 3.5 percent this year.

By contrast, Russia’s total defense spending reached RUB 6.3 percent of GDP and 32.5 percent of the federal budget.

Putin claimed in December 2025 that since February 2022, Russia increased tank production by 2.2 times, aircraft by 4.6 times, strike weapons and ammunition by 22 times, infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers by 3.7 times, electronic warfare and communications equipment by 12.5 times, and rocket artillery by 9.6 times, with the defense sector now employing approximately 4.5 million people and accounting for 20 percent of all manufacturing jobs.

General Christopher Cavoli told the US Senate Armed Services Committee in April 2025 that Russia is replacing battlefield losses at an unprecedented rate due to industrial expansion and full transition to a war economy.

Keep reading

FAA Targets Video Gamers to Alleviate Air Traffic Controller Shortage

In an effort to solve the decades-long shortage of air traffic controllers across U.S. airspace, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has announced a new hiring campaign targeted at video gamers interested in new career opportunities.

“To reach the next generation of air traffic controllers, we need to adapt. This campaign’s innovative communication style and focus on gaming taps into a growing demographic of young adults who have many of the hard skills it takes to be a successful controller,” Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said in a statement on April 10.

Announced last Friday, the FAA’s new air traffic controller hiring window opens at 12 a.m. ET on April 17, allowing interested candidates to apply for what the agency calls “one of the most dynamic jobs in the world.”

The FAA has faced a significant shortage of air traffic controllers since the 1980s, with thousands of retirements during the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbating the deficit. Congress has provided the agency with supplemental funding over the past two years to increase staffing, and the Trump administration said it has thousands of trainees in the pipeline.

The FAA is also not the first federal agency to target video gamers with keen hand-eye coordination and quick decision-making skills for high-stakes positions. Both the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security have deployed similar strategies for tech-related roles in complex environments that require hours of focus.

The FAA is rolling out a new YouTube ad with bright and fluid graphics asking gamers, “Are you up for the challenge? You’ve been training for this.”

Keep reading

Hormuz Blockade: Europe Mobilizing Against the U.S., Not the Iran Regime

When President Trump announced on Truth Social that the U.S. Navy would blockade “any and all Ships trying to enter, or leave, the Strait of Hormuz,” he also instructed the Navy to interdict vessels that had paid tolls to Iran and to destroy mines Iran had placed in the waterway.

CENTCOM subsequently clarified the actual scope: the blockade applies to vessels entering or departing Iranian ports and coastal areas and does not affect ships transiting the strait to and from non-Iranian ports. The blockade is therefore a naval embargo on Iranian trade, not a closure of the strait to international shipping generally.

Trump took the action in response to Iran’s “world extortion.” The IRGC had imposed a de facto toll regime in the strait. The Tehran regime said that vessels would be required to submit documentation, obtain clearance codes, and accept IRGC-escorted passage through a single controlled corridor. Trump’s goal was to stop Iran from policing the strait and profiting from its closure while the rest of the world absorbed the economic damage.

Neither the U.S. nor Israel is dependent on oil transiting the Strait of Hormuz. Around the globe, the U.S. is the primary enforcer of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), maintaining freedom of navigation for all countries. Trump’s request for Europe and other allies to support U.S. freedom-of-navigation patrols in the Strait of Hormuz was rejected.

Europe’s argument was that the U.S. took action against Iran unilaterally and therefore could not expect European support. President Trump’s position is that the U.S. has spent trillions defending Europe and keeping sea lanes open around the globe for 70 years, and it was reasonable to ask for reciprocity.

Instead, Europe blames Trump for the Hormuz closure, completely ignoring the fact that it is the IRGC, not the U.S., that has closed the strait.

Their refusal to help reopen it is a classic example of cutting off your nose to spite your face, since Europe’s energy supplies are at stake, not America’s. However, anger at Trump is mobilizing Europe to form a coalition to protect the Strait from America rather than from Iran.

Keep reading

Appeals Court Torches Boasberg For Targeting Trump Immigration Officials: ‘Clear Abuse of Discretion’

D.C. District Chief Judge James Boasberg suffered a humiliating legal defeat on Tuesday in his efforts to stymie President Trump’s deportation of illegal aliens from the United States.

In a 2-1 ruling, a three-judge panel for the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals shot down the Obama appointee’s attempted criminal contempt proceedings against Trump administration officials involved in last year’s deportation of suspected Tren de Aragua gang members to El Salvador. More specifically, the panel granted the government’s request for a writ of mandamus, “a rare and extraordinary order from a higher court directing a lower court or government official to stop exceeding their authority,” as described by the Washington Examiner.

The D.C. Circuit panel had temporarily halted Boasberg’s criminal contempt proceedings against the administration back in December. As noted by Judge Neomi Rao in her Tuesday opinion, however, Boasberg nonetheless plowed ahead by “expand[ing]” his inquiry “to extract more information from government counsel about exactly what happened” throughout the aforementioned deportations.

Those actions, Rao summarized, amount to a “clear abuse of discretion” by Boasberg.

“The district court proposes to probe high-level Executive Branch deliberations about matters of national security and diplomacy. These proceedings are a clear abuse of discretion, as the district court’s order said nothing about transferring custody of the plaintiffs and therefore lacks the clarity to support criminal contempt based on the transfer of custody,” Rao wrote for the majority. “Moreover, the government has already provided the name of the responsible official [then-DHS Secretary Kristi Noem], so further judicial investigation is unnecessary and therefore improper. In these circumstances, mandamus is appropriate to prevent the district court from assuming an antagonistic jurisdiction that encroaches on the autonomy of the Executive Branch.”

Keep reading

DOJ Sues Connecticut, City of New Haven Over Sanctuary Policies

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) sued Connecticut and the City of New Haven on April 13 over policies limiting cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.

The DOJ challenged Connecticut’s Trust Act and an executive order issued by New Haven’s mayor, arguing that they conflicted with federal immigration law and the Constitution. Specifically, the DOJ alleged violations of the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, which says federal law takes precedence over state and local laws.

“For years, Connecticut communities have paid the price of these misguided sanctuary policies,” Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate of the DOJ’s Civil Division said in an emailed statement. “This lawsuit seeks to end such open defiance of federal law.”

The department named Connecticut, Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont, Connecticut Attorney General Tong, the City of New Haven, and New Haven Mayor Justin Elicker as defendants.

The Trust Act, which was amended in 2025, limits when law enforcement officers can detain individuals based on civil immigration detainers. It directs officers not to hold someone solely on such a detainer unless certain conditions are met, such as the existence of a judicial warrant or a prior conviction for specific serious offenses, including certain crimes including murder, manslaughter, burglary, or sexual assault. The law also applies in cases where an individual has been flagged in federal security databases.

That has hindered cooperation between state and local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities in enforcing immigration laws, the DOJ argued.The DOJ also stated that the law prohibits law enforcement officers from using resources to communicate with federal immigration authorities regarding the custody or release of an individual targeted by a civil immigration detainer.

The law also forbids law enforcement officers from arresting or detaining an individual based on an administrative warrant, according to the lawsuit.

Another issue that the DOJ raised was a 2020 executive order issued by New Haven Mayor Justin Elicker. That order limited the disclosure of personal information—including immigration status—without an individual’s consent and restricts local officials from inquiring about a person’s immigration status in most situations. The DOJ claimed those provisions obstruct federal enforcement efforts.Connecticut and New Haven’s sanctuary policies “threaten and harm the United States’ sovereign interest in the supremacy and enforcement of federal law,” especially the Immigration and Nationality Act, according to the Justice Department.

The lawsuit stated that the sanctuary policies are “an active and deliberate effort to obstruct federal immigration enforcement by, among other things, impeding the communication between federal, state, and local law enforcement officials, and the safe apprehension and detention of [those] unlawfully present.”

Keep reading

French Police Tries to Raid Elysée Palace in Corruption Probe, but Are Denied Entrance by Presidency Staff Invoking Macron’s Immunity

A Panthéon corruption scandal is brewing.

A new French corruption scandal erupted today (14) as financial and anti-corruption police raided services linked to the Élysée Palace as part of an investigation opened in October 2025.

The probe is looking into allegations of favoritism, conflict of interest, corruption, and influence peddling when awarding public contracts for organizing prestigious Panthéon ceremonies by the Centre des Monuments Nationaux (Center of National Monuments).

French cops are focusing on Shortcut Events, which monopolized the organization of all such €2 million ceremonies from 2002 to 2024.

Investigators want to know if the contracts awarded to the same firm involved improper support from the Élysée, Ministry of Culture, or related bodies, bypassing normal procurement rules.

But the French police found the doors of the Presidential Palace closed to them.

Politico reported:

“The French presidency refused to let investigators enter the Elysée Palace on Tuesday as part of a probe into contracts linked to memorial ceremonies, invoking the immunity enjoyed by French President Emmanuel Macron.

The investigators that presented themselves at the Elysée Palace weren’t granted entry, according to a French presidency official who was granted anonymity for protocol reasons.

‘Investigators were told that the documents pertaining to Élysée Palace staff, which are unrelated to the President’s official duties and can therefore be disclosed, would be provided to them upon request’, an Elysée official said.”

Keep reading