Blog

Dem senators rally behind El-Sayed but duck questions on progressive agenda

Senate Democrats are rallying around Michigan Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed in the race to beat Republican Mike Rogers as the party scrambles to defend its seat in an effort to win back the Senate majority.

El-Sayed narrowly defeated moderate Rep. Haley Stevens after a bruising primary that exposed the party’s progressive-moderate divide, leaving Democrats with the task of unifying behind him ahead of one of the nation’s most competitive Senate races.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., a progressive who endorsed El-Sayed, told Fox News Digital Friday that he believes El-Sayed will beat Rogers in November.

Several Democratic senators approached by Fox News Digital expressed confidence in El-Sayed, even after prominent Democrats chose to back Stevens during the primary over questions of whether El-Sayed could win in November.

“I am very confident we’re going to win in Michigan,” Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., said.

But the same senators weren’t as quick to defend or back some of his more radical policies — like calling for defunding the police, abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Medicare for all and his strong opposition to Israel.

“You can ask him,” Murray said after Fox News Digital followed up by asking for her views on his more extreme policies.

Sen. Tina Smith, D-Minn., also said she thinks El-Sayed will beat Rogers, but when Fox News Digital asked about her views on his policies, she walked away saying she was “looking for the ladies room.”

Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., said “time will tell” when asked if he could beat Rogers in the general election. He was the only lawmaker to tell Fox News Digital he actually disagreed with some of El-Sayed’s progressive policies.

“He’s got 90 days,” Warner said. “He brought a lot of energy. There are obviously places I don’t fully agree with him either.”

Keep reading

Trump Threatens To Jail Arms Shortage ‘Leakers’

President Trump on Thursday threatened “leakers” with jail time over reports about dwindling US military stockpiles as a result of the Iran war, and claimed the US had plenty of munitions available.

“The US has massive amounts of ‘munitions,’ especially of certain types. Additionally, large amounts are being manufactured and shipped to the US as needed,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

“Defense companies are building the largest number of plants and factories in our country’s history. The ‘leakers’ of these treasonous statements are being hunted down,” the president added.

Some of the most significant reports about the shortage of advanced munitions didn’t come from media reports but from analysis published by the think tank the Center for International Studies (CSIS), which used publicly available data to produce its estimates.

CSIS found that the US has used about 60% of its advanced Patriot air defense missiles and about half of its interceptors for the THAAD missile defense system, though sources told CNN that the US had actually used about 80% of its THAADs during the war.

While Trump says that US arms makers are working to produce more munitions, the current rate of weapons use far exceeds the rate at which they can be produced, and it will take years to significantly increase production.

Media reports have also said that the US has used up nearly all of its ATACMS missiles and Precision-Strike Missiles, which were both used extensively in strikes on Iran.

Keep reading

Ninth Circuit En Banc Delivers Massive Election Integrity Victory: Arizona Can Now Enforce Voter Registration Cancellation and Felony Provisions After Left-Wing Groups Lose Standing Battle

The full Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday vacated a lower court’s preliminary injunction and cleared the way for Arizona to enforce two key 2022 election integrity provisions that left-wing activist groups had blocked for years.

The en banc ruling in Arizona Alliance for Retired Americans v. Mayes hands a decisive defeat to the Arizona Alliance for Retired Americans, Voto Latino, and Priorities USA, the usual cast of Democrat-aligned voter registration outfits that sued to stop common-sense reforms aimed at preventing double voting and out-of-state voting schemes.

These groups claimed Arizona’s “Cancellation Provision” and “Felony Provision” somehow interfered with their “core” activities of registering and mobilizing voters. The full court wasn’t buying it.

Arizona’s Senate Bill 1260, passed in 2022, strengthened the state’s ability to keep voter rolls accurate:

  • The Cancellation Provision requires a county recorder to cancel a voter’s registration in that county once the recorder receives confirmation (or confirms credible information) that the person has registered to vote in another Arizona county. This is basic list maintenance to stop people from remaining registered — and potentially voting — in multiple counties.
  • The Felony Provision makes it a crime to knowingly provide a “mechanism for voting” to someone who is registered to vote in another state. The statute gives the example of forwarding an early ballot.

Left-wing groups sued, claiming these measures would force them to divert resources and chill their registration drives. A district court judge obliged them with a preliminary injunction. A three-judge panel later vacated that injunction, but the full court took the case en banc.

The majority opinion, written by Judge Anthony D. Johnstone, delivers a clear message rooted in the Supreme Court’s 2024 decision in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine: organizations cannot manufacture Article III standing simply by spending money to oppose a law they dislike or by claiming their “mission” is frustrated.

Under Hippocratic Medicine, an organizational plaintiff must show the challenged law “directly affect[s] and interfere[s] with [its] core business activities.” Mere diversion of resources to educate people about a law or to advocate against it is not enough.

Keep reading

Scientists Warn Of Urgent AI Biosecurity Threat

For the first time, artificial intelligence has designed complete, functional viral genomes from scratch.

Oh dear.

Stanford University and Arc Institute researchers used generative AI models to produce 16 novel bacteriophages that successfully infect and kill bacteria in the lab.

Officials insist the viruses “pose no threat to people,” yet biosecurity experts are already sounding the alarm that the same technology opens the door to inventing dangerous pathogens.

The breakthrough, published in the journal Science, marks the first time generative AI has written entire viable viral genomes.

Researchers trained genome language models known as Evo 1 and Evo 2 on millions of natural genetic sequences. They then tasked the systems with designing complete bacteriophage genomes based on the well-studied ?X174 template that infects E. coli.

Of 302 synthesized designs, 16 proved fully functional: they assembled into virus particles, replicated inside bacterial cells, and in some cases outperformed the natural virus, even overcoming bacterial resistance when used as a cocktail.

Oh dear.

Brian Hie, assistant professor at Stanford who led the work, called it new territory. “This is a next step in the complexity that’s designable by generative AI, this is the first time generative AI has been used to design a complete genome, it’s something that can replicate and have other functions inside cells… this was new territory for us,” he told the BBC.

The team deliberately excluded genetic data from viruses capable of infecting complex organisms and conducted the work in a secure laboratory. The resulting phages target only specific bacteria.

Patrick Cai, a synthetic biologist at the University of Manchester not involved in the study, called it “an important milestone.”

Yet the same experts who celebrate the medical potential for phage therapies against antibiotic-resistant infections are issuing blunt warnings.

In an accompanying commentary in Science, Dr. Thomas Inglesby and Dr. Moritz Hanke of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security wrote that the findings raise “urgent biosafety and biosecurity questions.”

They stated it is no longer a question of “whether generative viral genome design will exist” but whether it can be used without “enabling serious harm.”

Oh dear.

Keep reading

Planned Parenthood Comes Up With Sick New Euphemism for Abortion

One of the left’s favorite fronts to fight the culture war is language.

They have seen great success in sowing confusion and disharmony by manipulating words, distorting words from their original meaning, and striking words from the vernacular deemed offensive or politically incorrect.

A new development on that front comes from the pro-abortion organization Planned Parenthood.

It was not bad enough that this is arguably the most prominent advocate and culprit in carrying out child murder in history. They now have a more benign term for doing it.

On Monday, the Planned Parenthood official page on social media platform Facebook posted a message which reads, “Reproductive freedom means every person gets to decide what’s right for their own body. No exceptions.”

An image was also posted saying, “Abortion is gender-affirming care.”

That’s certainly a new one. “Gender-affirming care” usually relates to bodily harm done to people — who are often mentally ill — believing they are members of the opposite sex.

Among those practices are barbaric procedures like double mastectomies or outright genital mutilation.

How does Planned Parenthood believe this euphemism relates to child murder?

The rhetoric from abortionists seeks to empower women. Are women affirming their gender by killing their children? To try to understand the message is to try to understand madness.

The comments are highly critical of the organization.

One Facebook user asked, “What does that even mean?”

Keep reading

Britain’s Hybrid Threats Directorate: Whitehall’s Ministry for Manufacturing Enemies

A British government operation established to counter Russian disinformation has expanded to Iran, China and Gaza, according to leaked Foreign Office files examined by David Miller, a British political sociologist and investigative researcher specialising in the study of propaganda and political influence.

Miller’s investigation for MintPress News draws on internal government pages and an organizational chart naming officials, specialist teams and private contractors. The documents expose part of a state apparatus that operates with little public scrutiny while monitoring and countering narratives deemed threatening to British interests.

At the centre of the files is the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office’s Information Threats and Influence Directorate. Its teams covered Russia, China and Iran, while another structure worked on Israel and Gaza. Miller reports that the directorate was later absorbed into the Cyber, Information and Tech Threats Directorate. Its functions now appear to fall within the broader Hybrid Threats Directorate.

Iran was not merely added to a list of foreign concerns. Miller reports that leaked charts place the China and Iran desk under the same official who led a semi-detached team focused on Israel and Gaza, with personnel developing proactive campaigns alongside regional and communications departments. The documents therefore place work concerning Iran, Israel and Gaza within an overlapping institutional structure, showing how the same Foreign Office information-threat structure could be directed across related geopolitical issues.

The Gaza operation emerges amid an unprecedented crackdown on Palestine solidarity in Britain. The government proscribed Palestine Action under terrorism legislation in July 2025. Since then, more than 3,300 people have been arrested and over 1,200 charged with terrorism-related offences, many for peacefully opposing the ban. The UN human rights chief warned that the proscription misused counterterrorism law and threatened freedom of expression, assembly and association.

The leaked files expose another layer of state power behind that visible police response. Government analysts monitor political narratives and trace how they circulate, while intelligence agencies, communications teams and contractors develop measures against activity classified as foreign manipulation. Ministers have already portrayed pro-Palestinian demonstrations as having been “hijacked” by people seeking to sow division. Within the information-threat apparatus described by Miller, such rhetoric can recast opposition to British support for Israel as something imported, manipulated or dangerous rather than a genuine political response to the destruction of Gaza.

Once dissent enters that system, official assessments can shape government messaging, engagement with online platforms, funding decisions and how people are treated across public institutions. The machinery exposed by Miller allows officials to define the threat, identify its alleged carriers and intervene without disclosing the evidence behind those judgments.

Parliamentary oversight has not kept pace. The Intelligence and Security Committee has warned that security functions transferred into policy departments have escaped its scrutiny. The government blocked attempts to extend the committee’s remit to bodies including the Counter Disinformation Unit and the Foreign Office’s intelligence policy department, preventing what the committee called “effective scrutiny by Parliament.”

Keep reading

Communist NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani Given a New Nickname as Details Emerge Regarding His Remarkably ‘Thin-Skinned’ Behavior Behind Closed Doors

It turns out that Marxist NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who presents himself as a smiling, smooth-talking salesman, is quite a different person behind the scenes. And it has spawned a new nickname which he won’t like.

The New York Post dropped a remarkable story on Thursday night, which extensively describes a mayor who becomes a nasty bully when things do not go his way.

The paper notes that Mamdani is easily angered not only by press criticism but also by people who dare to utter unflattering words toward him in public.

Mamdani even places personal phone calls to politicians he thinks will back off their attacks and eventually bow to him.

From the Post:

Social media-savvy Mayor Zohran Mamdani is developing a reputation IRL as “thin-skinned” and hyper-sensitive to public criticism, despite hyping himself online as a smiling and unflappable politician, scores of insiders spilled to The Post.

Behind the scenes, Hizzoner huffily badgers critics who dare question him publicly, harbors petty grudges against prominent pols, and often only responds to texts when he’s miffed about bad press, according to interviews with more than a dozen elected officials, consultants, and other politicos.

“I see more and more he cannot handle criticism, but mainly from elected officials who he thinks he can push around,” one political consultant said.

“The mayor personally reaches out when electeds criticizes him publicly. If they speak, then he cares. He cares because he doesn’t want bad press. It shows a sensitivity.”

A major sore spot for the narcissistic mayor is when he hears Jewish New Yorkers taking issue with his attacks on Israel. As we all know, Mamdani despises the Jewish State and has threatened to have Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu arrested.

Sources said the mayor personally called at least one elected official who attended the news conference, complaining about being told to tone down his rhetoric — and upset that their exhortation was connected to his video branding Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a “war criminal,” which was posted days before the attack.

NYC Democrat operatives and politicians went on to describe Mamdani as someone who uses his phone as “a security blanket” while obsessing over how many lies he gets on an X post.

Keep reading

The Fourth Turning Global War Has Already Bankrupted America — And Nobody’s Counting the Bodies

The numbers came in just after dawn on the East Coast, and they told a story that no amount of White House spin could obscure. Oil futures had stabilized at $86 per barrel overnight—a figure that would have seemed catastrophic eighteen months ago but now represented a temporary reprieve from the $119 spike that had crippled global markets in April. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve, that emergency backstop established after the 1973 crisis, had fallen to 305 million barrels, its lowest level since 1983. The Congressional Budget Office quietly released its revised deficit projections: $2.3 trillion for fiscal year 2026, with another $1.8 trillion locked in for 2027 before accounting for the war’s accelerating costs, currently running at $1 billion per day with no exit strategy visible on any horizon.

This is not a recession. This is not a “period of heightened geopolitical tension.” This is the systematic dismantling of the global economic architecture that has sustained Western prosperity for eighty years, compressed into a timeframe too brief for institutional adaptation. We are witnessing, in real-time, the transition from a unipolar American-led order to a fragmented multipolar system, and the violence of that transition is being measured not just in body counts—though those are mounting in ways the Pentagon refuses to fully disclose—but in the erosion of strategic leverage that cannot be recovered once spent.

The Fourth Turning Global War has entered its terminal phase, and the metrics suggest we are only beginning to comprehend the depth of the strategic trap into which American policy has walked.

To understand the present crisis, one must first abandon the comforting narrative of accidental drift—the notion that policy errors and miscalculation have led to the current impasse. The data suggests something more troubling: a decoupling of strategic decision-making from national interest calculation, producing outcomes that serve no identifiable American objective while advancing the interests of regional actors with disproportionate influence over U.S. policy formation.

Consider the timeline with the precision of a military after-action report. On February 27, 2026, the United States initiated a surprise decapitation strike against Iranian leadership while Israeli envoys maintained ostensible negotiations in Geneva. The strike eliminated Iran’s military command structure and political leadership in a forty-eight-hour bombardment that the White House initially projected would conclude within “four to five weeks.” That projection, made on March 1, has now stretched to month five with no conclusion visible. The Strait of Hormuz, through which twenty percent of global petroleum flows, has been effectively closed since mid-March. Iranian ballistic missile strikes, utilizing Chinese targeting data and Russian satellite intelligence, have damaged or destroyed every major U.S. installation in the Persian Gulf, including Al Udeid in Qatar, Prince Sultan in Saudi Arabia, and the naval facilities at Bahrain.

Keep reading

James Talarico Refuses Questions After Report Finds He Voted Five Times Using Parents’ Address

Texas Democrat Senate candidate James Talarico is refusing to answer questions about his residency and voting history after publicly demanding that Republican opponent Ken Paxton answer questions about allegations concerning his conduct.

Talarico’s campaign promoted an ad on X writing,

“Ken Paxton is refusing to answer basic questions about his corruption and criminal record.

Texans are demanding answers. What are you hiding, @KenPaxtonTX?” 

The challenge comes as The Texas Tribune and ProPublica reported that Talarico voted in five elections using his parents’ address after buying a home about six miles away in June 2022, and did not update his voter registration until September 2024. His campaign declined to answer questions about when he began living at the home he owns, instead citing “credible threats” from “right-wing actors” trying to locate Talarico and his family. The outlets noted that Texas law requires residents to register to vote where they live, but Texas ethics attorney Andrew Cates described the residency provisions as “broad and vague,” stating that prosecuting such cases would require proof that a voter knowingly or intentionally broke the law.

Breitbart News reported July 28 that Paxton said Talarico committed election fraud after reports raised questions about whether he had satisfied residency requirements before running for his Texas House seat. “James Talarico has proven he has zero regard for Texans and the rule of law,” Paxton said. “He’s been lying to voters and shamelessly committing election fraud to hold onto power.” Talarico’s campaign maintained that he lives and is registered at the north Austin home he purchased in 2022.

The issue followed Talarico to Arlington this week.

After delivering a policy speech there, Talarico did not take questions from reporters, according to CBS News Texas.

A separate video posted by RNC Research shows a man approaching Talarico and asking, “Why did you commit voter fraud?” A Talarico staffer then takes the man’s phone and turns it off.

Paxton’s campaign spokeswoman Madison Cercy told Breitbart News exclusively, “Talarico has been spoon-fed easy questions by the media throughout his entire time in office and is now refusing to answer credible questions about how he committed voter fraud. Talarico has spent his campaign flip-flopping and lying to Texans with zero accountability. Talarico must answer for defrauding his constituents by falsely claiming to live at his mother’s house.”

Paxton, meanwhile, shared a photograph showing him taking questions from a crowd of reporters during the announcement of his “Protecting the Texas Promise” agenda.

Talarico’s campaign has previously invoked “right-wing operatives” while responding to scrutiny involving the candidate. The New York Times reported that Talarico is dating health care lobbyist Brianna Menard, his former chief of staff, and that the relationship began while she worked as a top aide to him. “Four years ago, after he and his then-chief of staff developed feelings for each other and started dating, she left the office to pursue other opportunities,” Ennis said. “As right-wing operatives continue to attack James’s loved ones, the campaign is asking the public to respect Brianna’s privacy as a private citizen.” Texas House rules do not prohibit lawmakers from having relationships with lobbyists or staff members, according to the Times.

Keep reading

The Countries That Will Pay for the UN Tax Experiment

A United Nations proposal would replace the current system of taxing each multinational subsidiary separately with a global unitary tax system. A corporation’s worldwide profits would first be combined into one total and then divided among countries according to a formula measuring where it employs workers and where its customers purchase goods and services. Each country would apply its own corporate tax rate to the portion assigned to it, regardless of where the company legally reported the profit.

Tax Justice Network estimates that this reallocation would produce an additional $500 billion in annual corporate tax revenue worldwide. It would be redistributed among governments, creating major winners while stripping revenue from countries whose economies currently benefit from corporate headquarters, intellectual property, financial services, or low-tax structures.

Ireland would suffer one of the largest losses, surrendering an estimated $11.15 billion annually, or 81.9% of the multinational corporate tax revenue measured by the study. Hong Kong would lose $9.37 billion, or 75.7%; Singapore $8 billion, or 69.2%; Switzerland $5.43 billion, or 42%; the Netherlands $3.16 billion, or 28.4%; and Malta $3.04 billion. Bermuda would lose $489 million, the British Virgin Islands $496 million, Puerto Rico $547 million, Jersey $510 million, and Mauritius $152 million.

These jurisdictions currently tax profits that multinational corporations book within their borders despite having relatively little employment or customer activity there. The UN formula would disregard where those profits are legally reported and redistribute them toward countries where the company’s workers and customers are located.

Keep reading