Blog

Auditors Downplay Tens Of Thousands Registered To Vote Without Proof Of Citizenship In Oregon

After revelations that Oregon’s “motor voter” system registered hundreds of possible noncitizens, the state government launched an audit. Auditors found one in 35 voters didn’t have proof of citizenship — then looked the other way.

Oregon officials discovered in September hundreds of potential noncitizens had registered to vote. They examined limited data and eventually found the motor voter system had placed more than 1,600 possible ineligible voters on the rolls. 

State leaders commissioned an audit — which, as Oregon journalist Jeff Eager first reported, found one in 35 voters labeled as “citizens” had no proof of such citizenship in the motor voter system.

The state’s motor voter system reportedly registered 766,756 people total to vote, as of September. The one-in-35 ratio (2.8 percent), applied across the state, suggests the system may have registered more than 21,470 voters without proof of citizenship. 

Instead of flagging this lack of documentation as a massive gap in election integrity, the auditor — Chicago firm Baker Tilly — dismissed it, saying this would probably be too small to decide elections.

“Although the number of potentially ineligible individuals being automatically registered to vote is likely too small to affect the outcome of an election, the existence of such cases poses a moderate reputational and compliance risk,” the audit reads. 

It simply expressed concern the security gap could “undermine public trust in the voter registration process” and bring “increased scrutiny.”

But, as of November 2024, the Oregon DMV already registered 54,600 voters who have not proven citizenship. 

“The thing that got me the most was the consultant opining the error margin likely wouldn’t decide any elections,” Eager said in a direct message on X. He pointed to the state’s May special district elections, in which 25 races were so close they triggered a recount.

The audit, released July 1, noted numerous issues in Oregon’s motor voter system —  the lack of citizenship proof was only the first. 

Keep reading

New GOP-Backed Amnesty Bill Is A Gift To Dems And A Middle Finger To Voters

The release — or lack thereof — of the Epstein Files has consumed most of MAGA’s attention in recent days. But there’s something far more dangerous that deserves the full force of MAGA’s attention: a cadre of so-called Republicans is working to foist a mass amnesty program on the American people.

Florida Republican Rep. María Elvira Salazar reintroduced the DIGNITY Act on Tuesday, which, according to a press release from her office, “allows certain long-term undocumented immigrants to earn legal status, without amnesty or a path to citizenship” so that illegal aliens who broke the law can have an “opportunity.” The bill would create a “7-year earned legal status program allowing” illegal aliens “to live and work legally, with renewable status based on good conduct and restitution.”

“The legislation acknowledges a key truth: most undocumented individuals are not seeking citizenship at all costs, but rather the dignity of living and working legally, contributing to society, paying taxes, being safe from deportation, and traveling to see family during the holidays,” Salazar’s press release declares.

But no one deserves to be rewarded for violating our sovereign borders simply because they want to “pay taxes” and “work.” When Republicans dress up mass amnesty as “dignity,” they’re falling into the left’s trap — the lie that empathy must override the rule of law. It’s the same emotional blackmail we see time and time again that demands the American people legalize the presence of illegal aliens because they’ve found the rules too inconvenient to follow.

And conservatives should remember this is not the first time Republicans have been seduced by the false promise of compassionate amnesty. Ronald Reagan’s 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act was sold as a one-time fix — amnesty for nearly three million illegal aliens in exchange for real, long-lasting border security. The amnesty happened. The border security evidently did not. Reagan’s mistake was that he ceded an inch to people who have no intention of ever stopping there. His decision to grant mass amnesty signaled to Democrats that with enough grandstanding, they could get their way.

Keep reading

U.S. SCHOOLS use ILLEGAL SURVEILLANCE TOOLS to monitor students’ digital behavior without consent or knowledge

A newly published peer-reviewed study reveals that a growing number of U.S. schools are using government-funded online surveillance tools to monitor students’ digital behavior—often without their knowledge or consent—and warns that such practices may have serious consequences for children’s development and well-being.

  • 24/7 Student Surveillance Raises Privacy and Health Concerns: A peer-reviewed study found that 12 out of 14 school surveillance companies monitored students’ social media, emails, and online activity around the clock, often without clear consent from parents or students, potentially harming children’s learning, mental health, and social development.
  • Heavy Reliance on AI and Lack of Human Oversight: Most companies used AI to flag student behavior, but fewer than half had human reviewers. Researchers warned this could lead to false positives and discriminatory outcomes, particularly for marginalized students, due to algorithmic bias and lack of transparency.
  • Federal Funds Fuel Poorly Regulated Surveillance Tools: Many schools use federal education grants to fund these surveillance tools, despite limited evidence that they improve student safety. Researchers called for better oversight and questioned whether this is an appropriate use of government resources.
  • Parents Left in the Dark and Policymakers Urged to Act: The study highlighted that parents often don’t know their children are being monitored and may not have opt-out options. Authors recommended federal legislation to improve transparency, address AI bias, and require parental consent for off-campus monitoring.

Keep reading

“Snuff videos as a sales pitch”. Rafael boasts of human testing in Gaza death camps

Australia’s government awards rich contracts to Israeli drone maker Rafael, which skite to investors about killing Palestinians. Stephanie Tran reports.

Israeli weapons manufacturer Rafael Advanced Defense Systems has posted a video showing an unarmed man being stalked and killed by a drone in Gaza, using the footage to advertise the weapon responsible for his death.

The video, posted to the company’s official account on X, shows a Spike Firefly loitering munition drone as it hovers above a man walking alone through the rubble of a heavily bombed area. The drone silently tracks the man before detonating directly above him, killing him instantly. 

Meanwhile, a young Palestinian girl, Hala, was executed yesterday with a bullet to the the head fired by a quadcopter drone. It is even more grotesque that Israeli weapons manufacturers are crowing about their human testing labs – which are the killing fields of Gaza.

The Spike Firefly drone, first unveiled by Rafael in 2018, is a lightweight, soldier-deployed loitering munition designed for urban combat. Weighing just three kilograms, the drone is launched from a canister and can fly silently above a target for up to 15 minutes before striking with high precision.

The drone can be operated remotely with a tablet, and its camera feed allows operators to stalk targets in real time.

According to Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor, Israel has increasingly relied on drones like the Firefly to kill civilians in Gaza since October 7, 2023, with quadcopters being deployed in densely populated residential areas and refugee camps. Their report documents multiple instances of drones being used to assassinate individuals in violation of international humanitarian law.

Keep reading

Welcome To The Land Of The Free… Until You Express An Opinion

Britain’s cancel culture is a purposely designed social credit system.

Say the wrong thing, and you’re done for. One ‘offensive’ tweet? Straight to prison.

Say a silent prayer? You’re nicked.

Point out that men don’t have wombs, or that climate change hysteria is exaggerated? You’re sacked and shunned.

Post a meme that contradicts a government orthodoxy or expresses concerns about illegal immigration? Congrats, you’re now persona non grata and at risk of being given a holiday at His Majesty’s pleasure.

Welcome to the land of the free… until you express an opinion…

Great Britain, 2025, where the air is thick with sanctimonious twaddle, and our inalienable rights are under attack from the self-proclaimed elite. Those pompous, hypocritical overlords of ‘correct’ thinking have decided our words, thoughts, and even our chickens need their approval. Free speech? In the U.K., members of the public are in prison for sending a single tweet. And just wait until they roll out digital ID (the so called BritCard) and the Stasi levels of censorship which will follow.

The Establishment has closed its grip harder than Keir Starmer on free Arsenal tickets. Wielding censorship like a sledgehammer and telling us what constitutes ‘approved truth’ as though we’re living in Orwell’s 1984.

But fear not, because there’s a growing rebellion. Increasing numbers of Brits simply aren’t having it anymore. They see through this dystopian farce, preferring instead to give it the middle finger. Our great nation isn’t China or North Korea (though they’d like it to be). Britain is the crucible of free speech and has long championed open expression across literature, the arts and politics.

Amidst the madness, we salute a titan of liberty: John Milton, whose Areopagitica in 1644 stands as a blazing beacon for free speech. With a poet’s fire and a rebel’s heart, Milton faced down Parliament’s suffocating book licensing laws, daring to proclaim that truth thrives only when it wrestles openly with falsehood. “Let her and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worse in a free and open encounter?” he thundered, crafting a vision of Britain as a place for ideas, where no censor’s pen could silence the quest for truth. His words, a clarion call against tyranny, sowed the seeds for our nation’s proud claim as a bastion of free expression.

Keep reading

‘Protestors For Hire’ CEO Blows The Whistle, Says He Was Offered $20M To Stage Anti-Trump Event

The CEO of Crowds on Demand, a California-based firm that specializes in hiring actors in order to create the appearance of popular support for a cause or individual, revealed that he rejected a $20 million offer to provide actors for Democrat-backed “Good Trouble Lives On” protests scheduled for July 17.

“Crowds on Demand is your home for impactful advocacy campaigns, demonstrations, PR stunts, crowds for hire and corporate events. Services available nationwide,” the firm’s website reads. “We create out-of-the-box campaigns, audiences and events to make an impact for our clients.”

The group further notes that it can turn out “passionate” leaders and actors to any major metro area in the United States on short notice. “We’ve made campaigns involving hundreds of people come alive in just days. We have a proven record of delivering major wins on even the toughest campaigns and delivering phenomenal experiences with even the most logistically challenging events,” the website continues.

On Tuesday, Crowds on Demand CEO Adam Stewart made the shocking revelation while speaking with NewsNation. “We rejected an offer that probably is worth around $20 million … The value of the contract would have been worth around that amount nationwide to organize huge demonstrations around the country,” he said.

“But personally, I just don’t think it’s effective,” he added, further revealing that he declined the offer.

When pressed, Stewart did not provide additional details on who offered him the contract or when the offer was made. He did, however, note that he had serious concerns about potential violence and the events and reiterated his belief that accepting such a contract would be unproductive.

Keep reading

Obama-Biden Holdovers at NIH Continue Spending Tens of Millions on Cruel Dog Tests, Despite Claims of Phasing it Out

The National Institutes of Health (NIH), the world’s largest funder of biomedical research, is facing mounting criticism from across the political spectrum for its ongoing and newly funded experiments involving dogs.

Despite pledges from new leadership to reduce animal testing, recent revelations highlight persistent funding for controversial labs, sparking outrage from conservative figures like investigative journalist Laura Loomer and liberal-leaning outlets like The Guardian.

This bipartisan backlash underscores a rare consensus: taxpayer dollars should not support cruel and unnecessary animal abuse.

“Information obtained by…White Coat Waste shows that the NIH has in fact funded millions of dollars’ worth of new animal experiments…NIH has approved nine new grants for dog research since their April announcement, costing the taxpayer over $12M”

NIH under fire for funding… pic.twitter.com/4Zt3gFzBXg

— White Coat Waste (@WhiteCoatWaste) July 16, 2025

The NIH’s use of animals in research has long been a contentious issue, particularly following exposés during the tenure of former director Dr. Anthony Fauci. In 2021, the nonprofit White Coat Waste Project (WCW) uncovered and The Gateway Pundit reported on NIH-funded experiments where beagles were infested with sandflies and had their vocal cords removed to prevent barking during painful procedures.

The Trump administration has prioritized ending the barbaric practice.

Trump’s Navy, Department of Veterans Affairs, and EPA have already eliminated such testing in direct response to WCW’s investigations. Holdovers from the Obama and Biden Administrations appear to be preventing this kind of progress at the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

“Trump hates waste and animal experimentation is the poster child for wasteful spending. The best place to start would be to cut funding for animal labs which make up 40% of the NIH budget. It’s outdated, expensive, there’s little return for taxpayers and the American people don’t want pets tortured,” WCW Vice President Justin Goodman told The Guardian.

Keep reading

Epstein-Funded MIT Lab Hosted Panel On Giving Pedos Child Sex Robots

A Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) lab previously funded in part by Jeffrey Epstein hosted a panel where attendees openly discussed the idea of using “child-size sex robots” to treat pedophiles.

The MIT Media Lab’s July 2016 conference on research questions without “social and moral constraints” included a panel discussion arguing that pedophilia should not be seen as a “moral failing” but rather a medical condition and that the development of “child-size sex robots” is an inevitability, a transcript and video of the event shows.

The Media Lab’s ties to the disgraced financier span a 17-year period in which the lab readily accepted Epstein’s cash donations and facilitated introductions with its scientists on-campus and off, according to a 2020 fact-finding report commissioned by the university. The lab’s director contemplated inviting Epstein to one of its conferences in July 2016, the report states, the same month of the conference where the child-size sex robots were proposed, the only conference the lab hosted that month, according to its website.

“Once child-size sex robots hit the market, which they will, is the use of these robots going to be a healthy outlet for people to express these sexual urges and thus protect children and reduce child abuse? Or is the use of these robots going to encourage, normalize, propagate that behavior?” said one panelist. “We can’t research it [because of reporting restrictions]. But I do wonder whether they’re doing more harm than good in these cases. Because as much as people want these sexual urges — the urges, not the act — to be a moral failing, they are a psychological issue.”

“The issue of normalization, as you brought up. How does that change of society as a whole, and the acceptance of certain kinds of behavior?” another panelist said, while warning about the possibility of the robots being diverted to a black market for entertainment. “The notion of studying sexual deviance and actual normal humans interacting with these things can provide the basis for a deeper understanding of how that operates.”

The previously unreported panel comes to light as the public’s gaze once again fixates on Epstein’s ties to academia, Wall Street and government amid the Trump administration’s move to close the book on investigating the matter any further. The Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation announced in a July 7 memo that they had uncovered no “client list” and would not make further disclosures, spurring incredulity among the president’s supporters and driving a fracture between U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino. The memo also stated “Epstein harmed over 1,000 victims.”

Keep reading

UK Report Says Online Censorship Law Doesn’t Go Far Enough

The UK Parliament’s Science, Innovation and Technology Committee has spoken. And what it wants, in no uncertain terms, is an internet where opinions are shrink-wrapped, inspected, and potentially vaporized for being slightly off-script.

Its latest report, published with all the gravitas of a white paper on national survival, is framed as a response to the “Southport unrest” of 2024; a kerfuffle of confused narratives and bottle-throwing that apparently requires rethinking the entire relationship between the state, the internet, and the British people’s right to say something online.

We obtained a copy of the report of you here.

The Committee’s proposal is a legal downgrading of content they don’t like, and mass surveillance of users.

But don’t worry, it’s all in the name of “public safety” and “combating misinformation.” Which is the modern policy equivalent of “just trust us.”

Despite the ink barely being dry on the Online Safety Act, a law so sprawling and riddled with ambiguity it makes War and Peace look like a pamphlet, the Committee wastes no time throwing it under the bus.

Keep reading

USAID food for nearly 30,000 hungry kids to be destroyed: Official

Food intended to feed 27,000 starving children in Afghanistan and Pakistan will soon be incinerated in the wake of President Donald Trump’s closure of the United States’ aid agency.

A senior US official on Wednesday said nearly 500 tonnes of high-energy biscuits, to be used as emergency food for malnourished young children, expired this month while sitting in a warehouse in Dubai.

Under questioning by lawmakers, Michael Rigas, the deputy secretary of state in charge of management, tied the decision to the dismantling of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), which closed its doors on July 1.

“I think that this was just a casualty of the shutdown of USAID,” Rigas said, adding that he was “distressed” that the food went to waste.

Aid officials managed to save 622 tonnes of the energy-dense biscuits in June – sending them to Syria, Bangladesh and Myanmar – but 496 tonnes, worth $793,000 before they expired this month, will be destroyed, according to two internal USAID memos reviewed by Reuters, dated May 5 and May 19, and four sources familiar with the matter.

The wasted biscuits will be sent to landfills or incinerated in the United Arab Emirates, two sources said. That will cost the US government an additional $100,000, according to the May 5 memo verified by three sources familiar with the matter.

Keep reading