Blog

Conservative Pro-Debate Group Kicked Off Campus At Tennessee State University

A pro Debate conservative group known as “Fearless Debates” was kicked off campus at Tennessee State University as reported by Campus Reform.

In a widely viewed video on social media a man wearing a MAGA hat is seen being yelled at by students.

Later on an angry riot broke out with people throwing things at debaters Cam Higby and David Khait’s vehicle.

The students rioting also shouted Black power at the Cam and David.

The “Fearless Debates” posted on Instagram that the group was tabling at Tennessee State University was the first historically Black University they were visiting on this tour named Fearless Tour.

These debaters just wished to have a respectful exchange of ideas but sadly on many liberal campuses this is no longer accepted.

The signs they used to promote discussion stated “DEI should be illegal” as well as “Deport all illegals now! Lets talk!”.

According to News Channel 5 “Fearless Debates” said “they had come to create conversation and discourse.” They were eventually kicked off campus.

The university stated “The safety and well-being of our students, faculty and staff remain our highest priority. TSU will continue to uphold university policies and ensure that campus remains a safe, welcoming and orderly environment for all members of our community.”

The NAACP claimed this free speech group had sought to “antagonize, disrupt, and instill fear in a space created to be safe, affirming, and supportive of Black students.”

College was originally meant to be a place of different ideas and debates but apparently The NAACP doesn’t  agree with exposing students to different ideas.

Keep reading

If Socialists Actually Understood Socialism…

In light of recent developments in New York City, specifically on the recent primary elections and the emergence of self-described democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani as a potential mayoral candidate, as well as the increasingly aggressive public engagement of Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in their tour around the United States, and the fact that AOC’s chances of becoming the 2028 Democratic presidential nominee have doubled within one week, it has become clear to me that socialist rhetoric is gaining momentum in American political discourse.

This trend is further reflected in survey data from the Pew Research Center, which shows that approximately 36 percent of U.S. adults aged 18 to 29 now view socialism positively. In response to these developments, it is imperative to contribute to the proper education and clarification of what these socialists are actually advocating for, or even what true socialism truly advocates for.

Friedrich von Hayek, Nobel laureate and one of the most influential economists and political philosophers of the 20th century, once remarked, “If socialists understood economics, they wouldn’t be socialists.”

Building on his erudition, I would add: If socialists understood socialism, they wouldn’t be socialists.

The true definition of socialism is a social and economic doctrine that advocates for public, rather than private, ownership or control of property and natural resources—the means of production. It is both a political and economic system in which the means of production are owned and controlled collectively by the community or the state, rather than by private individuals. In other words, in practice, the means of production are controlled by a minority political elite.

Now, no matter whether an economic system is capitalist, socialist, or any other, it is important to note that the system itself is not a utopia or an end in and of itself, but a means to an end. Economic systems ration scarce resources, goods, and services, and each one does this through either a private or a social decision-making process, but only individuals can truly make decisions. Modern money economies operate on prices which reflect the value assigned by either individuals or groups, as well as supply and demand. However, who gets to decide what is supplied and what is demanded differs across these systems. Socialism claims that shared ownership will foster broader participation, leading to everyone sharing in the benefits. Although this is impossible, it remains the foundational argument.

Many socialists have bypassed the foundational principle of collective ownership of production and have instead jumped straight to demands for ownership or redistribution of the output of production. Production is seemingly taken for granted. This conceptual shortcut makes socialism seem like a dream economic system by avoiding what socialism really is.

Therefore, although many public and political arguments are made in the name of socialism, what is often advocated for is not true socialism. In reality, the debate has rarely centered on collective ownership of the means of production—such as the factories, tools, land, and capital that make production possible—but instead on ownership or control of the outputs of production (goods and services).

Simply put, many self-identified socialists are less interested in owning the means of production and more interested in claiming entitlement to what is currently being produced or the production that someone else already owns.

Keep reading

Assessing Reports That Ukraine Is Preparing A False Flag Drone Provocation Against NATO

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova raised global awareness of Hungarian media reports about a planned Ukrainian false flag drone provocation against NATO in her Telegram post on Friday. She hyperlinked to one of the outlets, Pesti Srácok, a little more than two hours after they published their editorial. It ended by citing unspecified Telegram posts about Ukraine’s plans to bomb logistics hubs in Poland and Romania with captured Russian drones and then blame Moscow.

Accordingly, there’s no solid intelligence about this, just social media reports that were picked up by the Russian Foreign Ministry and amplified by their spokeswoman. Nevertheless, this doesn’t mean that such a scenario isn’t credible, especially given the larger context. Trump just greenlit NATO downing Russian jets that violate the bloc’s airspace, which could arguably embolden some members to attempt this on false pretexts, thus risking a major escalation of NATO-Russian tensions exactly as Ukraine wants.

Likewise, if the most zealously anti-Russian ones along the alliance’s eastern frontier ultimately get cold feet after fearing that Trump might hang them out to dry, Ukraine could nudge them in the direction of offensive operations against Russia disguised as “reciprocal retaliation” via this false flag plot. The essence is similar to what Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service warned about twice over the summer regarding joint British-Ukrainian plots to stage false flag provocations in the Baltic Sea.

According to their sources, this would involve Ukrainian-transferred Soviet/Russian torpedoes hitting a US ship there or at least exploding in close proximity to it and/or fishing up Ukrainian-transferred Soviet/Russian mines, either of which could suffice for pulling Trump into mission creep. They could also falsely justify offensive actions on the grounds of “reciprocal retaliation”, albeit at sea in these scenarios, while the latest one that Zakharova warned about could include drones, airstrikes, and/or a no-fly zone.

Russia continues to gradually gain ground in the special operation zone, and while no breakthrough has yet to occur, the military-strategic dynamics are clearly in its favor and decisively against Ukraine’s. Taken to its conclusion, this trend will inevitably result in Russia controlling all the disputed territory with time, thus enabling Moscow to end the conflict on more of its terms by then. Ukraine wants to avert that scenario so it’s desperately trying to engineer the game-changer of direct NATO intervention to that end.

It’s only through such a dramatic development that the abovementioned dynamics could possibly be altered to at the very least freeze the conflict, which Ukraine and the West have demanded of Russia to no avail since that would leave unmet many of its goals in the conflict, ergo Ukraine’s false flag motives. Having captured Russian drones bomb NATO logistics hubs in Poland and Romania via a modern-day “Gleiwitz incident” as Zakharova described Ukraine’s reported plans to be might easily achieve that.

Keep reading

Yet Again, Deep State Attacks DNI Tulsi Gabbard

It is difficult not to notice the strategy of how certain Trump administration officials are targeted.

Any cabinet member that looks inward to reveal the status of corrupt activity within the information silo itself becomes a target. Cabinet officials who focus externally, meaning the majority of their effort looks outside government, are seemingly left alone.

HHS Secretary RFK Jr and Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, are examples of those receiving the worst ideological targeting from operations within HHS and the Intelligence Community respectively.

Conversely, CIA Director John Ratcliffe faces almost no scrutiny or targeting by the Intelligence Community as the silo operators frame narratives almost exclusively against DNI Gabbard.

The latest effort surfaces as embeds within Main Justice and the CIA frame a storyline that Tulsi Gabbard’s action in removing the security clearances of 37 current and former officials, has now resulted in those same officials being incapable of testifying against former CIA Director John Brennan (and others).

The premise of the narrative is ridiculous.  If we are to accept some current or former IC officials are willing to testify against Brennan (or others), regardless of whether Tulsi Gabbard has revoked their security clearances, their retroactive knowledge is still pertinent.  They are completely free to give statements and testimony based on their prior conduct.

What the leakers to Axios and the New York Times are trying to establish, is groundwork for the removal of Tulsi Gabbard. This stops her objective of investigating internal corruption.  I suspect most of the people trying desperately to undermine Gabbard are from within the CIA Directorate of Analysis, or at least in alignment with the directorate’s agenda.

The narrative’s author, Marc Caputo, claims AG Pam Bondi is hampered in her effort to criminally indict John Brennan because the witnesses Main Justice would use have lost their security clearances.  Again, the game of leveraging internecine friendships in/around the office of Trump becomes an overlay.

It is certainly true that AG Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel have refused to look internally; and it is also true that DNI Tulsi Gabbard has spent much of her focus time looking internally.  Bondi and Patel continue the preferred game of institutional blame-casting in Main Justice. Meanwhile, Gabbard is busy focused on cleaning up her IC house.

The Fourth Branch embeds do not fear the approach of Bondi/Patel, but the Fourth Branch embeds are petrified by the approach of Tulsi Gabbard.  That reality underpins the baseline of opposition against the Director of National Intelligence.

As the dynamic unfolds, CIA Director John Ratcliffe is certainly not corrupt; however, nor is he brave.  Director Ratcliffe is willing to let Director Gabbard clean up his house, and then he takes credit for the reform.  As the weeks unfold into months, this is becoming increasingly obvious.

Mark Zaid is the current anti-Trump Lawfare operative likely seeding the narrative to Axios/New York Times.

Keep reading

GUESS WHO’S NOT ABOVE THE LAW? MI SOS Benson In The Hot Seat After DOJ Sues Her For Blocking Access to Michigan’s Dirty Voter Rolls

On Thursday, the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division announced the filing of federal lawsuits against six states — California, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania for failure to produce their statewide voter registration lists upon request. The lawsuit against Benson was filed in U.S. District Court in Grand Rapids, charging that she is violating federal law by stonewalling investigators and demanding that she be compelled to turn over the records.

Michigan residents have watched Secretary of State Benson mock efforts by state lawmakers and threaten citizens who ask for transparency in elections since 2020, all in an effort to shield her dirty rolls from scrutiny.

The statement from the DOJ reminds Americans about the importance of well-maintained voter rolls: “Clean voter rolls are the foundation of free and fair elections,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “Every state has a responsibility to ensure that voter registration records are accurate, accessible, and secure — states that don’t fulfill that obligation will see this Department of Justice in court.”

“States are required to safeguard American elections by complying with our federal elections laws,” said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “Clean voter rolls protect American citizens from voting fraud and abuse, and restore their confidence that their states’ elections are conducted properly, with integrity, and in compliance with the law.”

Yesterday, in response to the lawsuit against her, the defiant Secretary of State, Jocelyn Benson, mocked the DOJ’s demand for transparency, saying, “It’s important for every Michigander to understand what’s at stake here – the U.S. Justice Department is trying to get us to turn over the private, personal information of more than 8 million state residents. That includes people’s driver’s license numbers, Social Security numbers, and other personally identifiable information.” Benson called it an”  illegal and unconstitutional power grab,” adding, “I told them they can’t have it.”

Perhaps someone should inform Jocelyn Benson that the government has access to the Social Security numbers of all American citizens. It’s not the American citizens who are legally registered to vote in Michigan that the DOJ is concerned about; it’s the ILLEGAL aliens and fake voters created during her 7 years in office that the DOJ is interested in reviewing.

Keep reading

House Intel inquiry sent criminal referral to DOJ on strange health incidents on Havana Syndrome

The GOP-led House Intelligence Committee sent criminal referrals to the Trump Justice Department earlier in September related to the congressional panel’s scrutiny of the federal government’s alleged mishandling of the mystery behind the so-called “Havana Syndrome” — officially termed anomalous health incidents (AHIs).

A spokesperson for the GOP-led House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) who declined to be named due to the sensitivities surrounding the HPSCI investigation, told Just the News over the weekend that the committee’s ongoing inquiry into AHIs has scrutinized the response by the U.S. intelligence community (IC) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and has identified a number of potentially illegal actions — which were referred to the Justice Department earlier this month. The spokesperson did not identify the exact target of the criminal referral.

The U.S. government has been investigating the unusual symptoms reported among its personnel serving abroad. If a foreign adversary is behind the AHIs, speculation has centered on Russia, China, and Cuba as possible culprits. Symptoms tied to alleged AHIs have included sound or pressure in one ear or on one side of the head and nearly simultaneous signs such as vertigo, the loss of balance, headaches, and ear pain.

Intelligence community questioned by lawmakers

The HPSCI spokesperson said additional criminal referrals might still be sent to the DOJ, particularly related to HPSCI’s review of the IC’s potential obstruction of the House committee’s inquiry into Havana Syndrome.

The House Intelligence CIA Subcommittee released an unclassified interim report in December 2024 arguing that a foreign foe might be behind AHIs and that leaders of U.S. spy agencies had wrongly dismissed this hypothesis. The subcommittee was chaired by Rep. Rick Crawford, R-Ark., who now chairs the full intelligence committee. The December report seemed to jolt Biden intelligence community leaders into opening the door to the chance that a foreign foe could indeed be behind the AHIs.

“Since joining the House Intelligence Committee in 2017, investigating reported Anomalous Health Incidents impacting our intelligence officers, service members, and diplomats stationed around the world has been a top priority of mine personally and remains one of my top priorities as Chairman,” Crawford told Just the News in a statement this weekend. “As I have said before, the Biden administration’s IC was wrong in its intelligence assessment on AHIs, and we are working to set the record straight. The IC generated and utilized the NIH study’s invalid results to prop up the highly flawed 2023 intelligence community assessment.”

Crawford continued: “Among the many issues involved, the withholding of medical care to force participation in this human subject research study, as directed by personnel in the IC, betrayed those desperately seeking help. We will deliver the truth these victims and the American people deserve after being gaslit by the intelligence community for so long.” 

Keep reading

FBI lab report, contradictory witness statement inject fresh mystery in unsolved J6 pipe bomb case

The unsolved case of two pipe bombs planted at the major political parties’ headquarters in Washington D.C. before the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol riot is facing new mystery after FBI Director Kash Patel transmitted to Congress the lab analysis and interviews with a key witness who is challenging the official timeline of events.

The documents obtained by Just the News show that both bombs — one planted at the Democratic National Committee and the other at the Republican National Committee — were filled with chemical building blocks of black powder, each was equipped with a 60-minute kitchen timer, and each had destructive potential.

But most notably, the FBI laboratory report never uses the word “viable” to describe either bomb. Both devices never exploded and were discovered about 16 hours after the FBI claimed they were planted outside both major party headquarters. 

“When properly assembled and initiated, an IED of this sort can cause property damage, bodily injury, or death,” the lab report stated. The report offered no clear explanation why the bombs — which it called “Improvised Explosive Devices” — did not detonate.

You can read that report here.

FBILabAnalysisJ6PipeBombs.pdf

Timeline of when bombs planted, discovered under review

The documents turned over by Patel to the House Judiciary Committee and its special Jan. 6 investigative subcommittee also raise questions about that timeline. They include interviews with a key witness who said the RNC device still had 20 minutes remaining on its timer when she discovered it the following day.

That witness raised the possibility that at least the RNC pipe bomb was planted just before it was discovered and not the night before as the FBI claimed.

The mystifying evidence now has congressional investigators exploring stunning new theories, including whether the bombs were made to look real but not to explode to create a diversion during the Jan. 6 protest or whether someone came back and set the timers later on one or both of the devices.

“The single greatest action that facilitated the protester’s ease of entry into the Capitol on January 6 was the placing of the pipe bombs, and the diversionary effect that had on security resources which would have otherwise been at the Capitol,” said Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., the chairman of the House Judiciary subcommittee that is investigating the law enforcement response to Jan. 6.

“After that day, the FBI was zealous in pursuing those trespassing at the Capitol, but quite lacking in their pursuit of whomever placed the pipe bombs,” he added. “One focus of this Committee will be highlighting the bizarre facts surrounding the pipe bomb case, hoping to bring much needed clarity on this subject to the American people.”

Lawmakers pilloried the FBI in a January report for the security failures surrounding the pipe bombs and the “chaotic response of federal law enforcement after their discovery,” Just the News previously reported. They also criticized the bureau for failing to provide “substantive updates” to Congress about the status of its investigation into the two bombs. 

The congressional panel also raised questions about how the FBI determined that both pipe bombs were “viable” explosive devices given that both were equipped with 60-minute kitchen timers, but were allegedly planted approximately 16 hours before they were discovered.

Keep reading

Trump Derangement Syndrome comes for heralded off-label autism treatment after president endorses

he medical establishment and mainstream media are uniting against the Trump administration’s re-purposing of an inexpensive drug to treat an epidemic, calling it “unproven,” not “backed by science,” “not a cure” and “shocking” to endorse, with The New York Times emphasizing no profit-driven drug company suggested it.

In President Trump’s first term, it was ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19. In his second, it’s prescription leucovorin to treat autism spectrum disorder.

Long used to treat chemotherapy side effects, leucovorin calcium tablets got approved last week by the Food and Drug Administration to treat “cerebral folate deficiency” (CFD), whose clinical symptoms include “global developmental delays with autistic features,” following its own “systematic analysis of literature” from 2009 through last year.

“Published case reports provided patient-level data on over 40 patients,” adult and child, with most of those given leucovorin treatment showing “substantial improvement of symptoms of CFD that would not be expected when compared to the natural history of CFD due to FOLR1 gene variants,” the Federal Register notice says.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. touted leucovorin to treat autism Monday with Trump and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Mehmet Oz, but it was quickly overshadowed by the other autism-related recommendation that pregnant women limit their use of Tylenol, which prompted a new TikTok challenge.

Keep reading

Mount Sinai: Prenatal Acetaminophen Exposure Increases Risks of Autism and ADHD in Children, According to Analysis of 46 Global Studies

Amid growing concern over neurodevelopmental disorders, a recent study from Mount Sinai Hospital has reignited the debate surrounding acetaminophen, commonly known as paracetamol or Tylenol.

This analgesic, used by over 50% of pregnant women worldwide to relieve pain and fever, maybe linked to an increased risk of autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in their children.

The report, published in August 2025 in the journal Environmental Health, analyzed 46 previous studies from international groups.

It applied the Navigation Guide methodology, a rigorous framework for evaluating environmental evidence. The findings show a consistent association: prenatal acetaminophen exposure increases the risk of autism by 19% (odds ratio 1.19) and ADHD by 26% (odds ratio 1.26).

Diddier Prada, MD, PhD, lead researcher at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, emphasized: “Our findings indicate that higher-quality studies are more likely to show a link between prenatal acetaminophen exposure and elevated risks of autism and ADHD.”

The analysis included 20 studies on ADHD, eight on autism, and 18 on other neurodevelopmental disorders. This is not an isolated finding. A 2019 Johns Hopkins study, based on umbilical cord blood samples from 996 children, found that high acetaminophen levels tripled the risk of autism (up to 3.62 times) and doubled the risk of ADHD (up to 2.86 times).

Researchers measured metabolites in blood at birth and followed the children for an average of 8.9 years. Another study, funded by the NIH in 2025, confirmed similar patterns: the middle third of exposure increased the risk of ADHD by 2.26 times and autism by 2.14 times.

These data come from cohorts such as the Boston Birth Cohort and the Nurses’ Health Study II. The underlying biology points to concerning mechanisms. Acetaminophen crosses the placental barrier and can induce oxidative stress, disrupt hormones, and cause epigenetic changes that interfere with fetal brain development. The risk appears heightened in the third trimester, when the brain develops rapidly.

In September 2025, the U.S. FDA responded with a letter to clinicians, initiating changes to product labels like Tylenol’s. It cited “accumulated evidence” of an association with autism and ADHD, recommending minimal doses and short-term use.

Keep reading

Drone Maker DJI Loses Lawsuit Over Inclusion on Pentagon’s ‘Chinese Military Company’ List

China-based drone maker DJI will remain on the Pentagon’s blacklist of Chinese companies working with Beijing’s military, after a D.C. federal judge dismissed its lawsuit challenging the designation on Sept. 26.

In his 49-page opinion, U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman ruled that the Pentagon’s finding that DJI contributes to the Chinese defense industrial base is “supported by substantial evidence,” even though he “cannot conclude” that DJI is “indirectly owned by the Chinese Communist Party.”

“DJI acknowledges that its technology can and is used in military conflict but asserts that its policies prohibit such use,” Friedman wrote. “Whether or not DJI’s policies prohibit military use is irrelevant. That does not change the fact that DJI’s technology has both substantial theoretical and actual military application.”

In other words, Friedman concluded that the Pentagon had presented enough evidence to call DJI a “military-civil fusion contributor” to China’s defense industrial base.

DJI, a private company headquartered in the southern Chinese city of Shenzhen, sells more than half of all commercial drones in the United States. In October 2024, it filed a lawsuit against the Pentagon after the latter placed the Chinese drone maker and many other Chinese companies on its list of “Chinese military companies” operating in the United States, under Section 1260H of the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act.

In a complaint, DJI called the Pentagon’s decision “unlawful and misguided,” and said that it “is neither owned nor controlled by the Chinese military.”

Keep reading