Blog

Mamdani: Nah, No IDs at City Grocery Stores — Illegals Welcome to Shop on the Taxpayer Dime

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani (D) is now promising that his taxpayer-funded, socialist grocery stores will require zero identification — meaning non-New Yorkers, including illegals and tourists, can stroll right in and load up on discounted food while actual residents foot the bill.

This comes after one of his own officials floated a “library-card-esque” system to make sure only city residents could take advantage of the 30 percent markdowns, sparking immediate outrage.

While critics may portray this as a ‘damned if you do’ trap for Mamdani, it’s not. The criticism yesterday was in the irony of requiring ID, which leftists, in opposition to the vast majority of Americans, believe is racist.

The reality, however, is worse.

“We’re talking about a city-run grocery store, one in each borough, which, by the way, you do not need an ID to shop at, no matter what you’ve just heard in the news of today,” the mayor told Joy Reid.

The implication is clear here. The outrage was a construct of the right. A fiction. And of course, Mediaite helped spread that idiotic narrative, with their angle that Mamdani “laugh(ed) off” the “MAGA uproar.”

The “uproar” was over the hypocrisy. And the concerns were not made up. 

Jeanny Pak, the interim president and CEO of the New York City Economic Development Corporation, said: “We are looking to make sure that we target New Yorkers, whether it be a sort of library card-esque thing, and also we manage who’s buying and that it is focused on everyday New Yorkers.”

Pretty clear-cut statement there.

Now that the mayor has pivoted and done a 180, it’s safe to assume they are not, in fact, “focused on everyday New Yorkers.”

Non-New Yorkers, including illegal aliens and out-of-towners, will be able to shop at the taxpayer-funded stores.

“NYC Grocery stores will be open to everyone. There will be no system to verify identity, residency, or income, and no one will be asked to show ID to shop,” a City Hall representative told the New York Post.

Funded on the backs of New Yorkers. But anybody can reap the benefits. This move continues the trend of Mamdani being a weapons-grade economic illiterate. He likes to discuss fairness for all but implements a government program that is inarguably unfair to actual residents of the city.

Keep reading

Socialist Mamdani Purges Business Leaders From Key NYC Fund

Radical socialist New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has purged a longstanding advisory board of business and civic leaders.

The Mayor’s Fund to Advance New York City is a city-affiliated 501(c)(3) nonprofit that raises private donations to support public programs and City Hall priorities by partnering with agencies, philanthropies, and community groups.

According to Bloomberg News, Mamdani sent letters thanking the advisory board members for their service. A separate communication from the fund stated that the entire board of advisers would be disbanded.

The New York Post reports:

It’s raised hundreds of millions since its 1995 inception – including a staggering $107 million to support family members of rescue workers killed or injured in the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks.

During the darkest days of the COVID-19 pandemic, the fund raised $54.5 million for an emergency relief fund that covered meals and personal protective equipment (PPE) for healthcare workers.

But Mamdani started eroding the fund’s lucrative business connections as soon as he took office in April, appointing a former dockworker and a high school teacher to serve on the fund’s board of directors.

In April 2026, Mamdani started to overhaul the Fund’s Board of Directors, shifting it away from lucrative corporate and business leadership toward working New Yorkers and progressive advocates.

He added a Bronx public school teacher, a former longshoreman/UAW organizer, and his own chief of staff, Elle Bisgaard-Church, as chair.

Keep reading

Historian Visits Smithsonian After a Decade, Finds ‘A Completely Different Place’ That Puts Activism Ahead of History

The Smithsonian Institution, particularly the National Museum of American History (NMAH ) and related exhibits, has been accused of downplaying or negatively reframing aspects of American history in favor of a more critical, race- and social-justice-focused narrative.

Dr. Jody Edward Ginn, a historian and museum professional, made his first visit in a decade and was troubled by what he found.

According to Fox News, after reading the administration’s Domestic Policy Council report accusing the Smithsonian and the NMAH of failing to present history “in a way that is inspiring, unifying, and worthy of our great republic,” he decided to travel from Texas to see for himself. He said he found it to be “a completely different place than when I was there in 2012.”

Per Fox News:

“Its mission is clearly exactly what they changed it to be. It is a museum for activism. They use history, but that’s kind of the problem. You know, scholars of history, and I don’t consider these folks scholars anymore. They’re activists.”

******

“From the moment I walked in, it’s a very different experience,” Ginn said. “Now, I wasn’t totally shocked by this because I’ve been watching this evolution in my field for over a decade.”

As he made his way through the exhibits, Ginn said the institution seeks to “specifically direct” visitors “to action” rather than give them the information to “make their own decisions.”

“It became this goal, their own stated goal, to turn museums from institutions of education, of public education, into institutions to encourage activism, which could also be said to indoctrinate.”

Ginn also noted that he found “factually incorrect information” and, in some exhibits, what the institution left out was just as misleading.

“The biggest problem is in what they leave out.”

NMAH’s shift toward wokeness and activism has been a hot topic in DC. During a House Oversight hearing, Rep. Brandon Gill (R-TX) grilled NMAH’s Director, Dr. Anthea Hartig, over the institution’s anti-white agenda and efforts to rewrite American history.

Keep reading

Spain’s Socialist Government Allocates €25 Million to Immigrant Minors Who Invaded Ceuta as One in Three Spanish Children Lives at Risk of Poverty

Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez’s Socialist government has announced an extraordinary €25 million package of public funds to care for the unaccompanied migrant minors (commonly known in Spain as MENAs) who arrived in the Spanish enclave of Ceuta during last week’s invasion.

The announcement comes as official figures show that between 28% and 33% of Spanish children live in poverty or are at risk of social exclusion—the highest child poverty rate in the European Union. That means roughly 2.6 million Spanish children are living in economically vulnerable conditions while the central government approves emergency funding for foreign minors who entered Spain during the recent border crisis.

The funding was announced Tuesday by Spain’s Minister of Inclusion, Social Security and Immigration, Elma Saiz, who said the money will be used to provide urgent assistance to the approximately 860 to 1,000 immigrant minors who remain under Ceuta’s custody following the illegal mass entry of tens of thousands of Moroccan nationals, most of them young men. The new funding comes on top of a previous €5.5 million allocation.

Saiz said the measure demonstrates the government’s “commitment” to protecting vulnerable people. Critics, however, argue that it effectively rewards what they describe as a mass illegal border incursion that challenged Spain’s sovereignty while thousands of Spanish children continue to face severe economic hardship.

Madrid Received Warnings—But Responded Too Late

The controversy intensified after reports emerged that Spain’s National Intelligence Center (CNI) had issued several warnings to the Interior Ministry in the days leading up to the border invasion about the risk of a mass crossing.

Keep reading

Young Woman Shares Distrubing Details of Child Migrant Program Under Biden’s HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra She Says Led Her Straight Into the Hands of Child Traffickers

On Monday, Republican Steve Hilton, who is running for Governor of California, shared disturbing testimony from a young migrant of life under the Child Migrant Program during the Biden administration.

Juana Rebecca Pérez Santay said the program, led by Hilton’s opponent in the governor’s race, Biden’s Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, kept her held ‘like a slave,’ and delivered her to child traffickers.

Juana, who says she was 17 when she crossed the southern border in May 2021, entered the federal system for unaccompanied minors, which Becerra boasted at the time was an “assembly line” through which minors flowed.

After she arrived, she was placed with a “sponsor,” an adult approved to act as her legal guardian, a process run by the Office of Refugee Resettlement, part of Health and Human Services, which Becerra oversaw.

She says she was taken from the shelter by a ‘social worker’ and left alone at an airport. She called the ‘sponsor’ who sent three men to pick Juana up.

After she got in their car, they told her, “You are going to stay here, but from today you are going to start working.”

Juana says she spent up to 20 hours a day, seven days a week,  making tortillas and food, while being deprived of food and water.

Keep reading

Spain Created the Invasion and Then Pretended to Be the Victim

Spain has demonstrated precisely why government is so often the source of the crisis rather than the solution. The Sánchez government issued a sweeping royal decree to legalize hundreds of thousands of undocumented migrants, bypassed Parliament, and then acted astonished when people outside Spain interpreted the message exactly as any rational person would: enter the country illegally today and the politicians may legalize you tomorrow.

The decree did not explicitly state that every migrant arriving by boat would automatically receive legal status. It applied to undocumented migrants who could prove that they had lived in Spain for at least five months before January 1, 2026, but leave it to government to hide the fine print. Then Spain’s Supreme Court restricted the immediate expulsion of migrants arriving by sea. Smugglers and social-media accounts distorted that ruling into a promise that anyone who entered Spanish territory through the water could not be sent back, and Madrid failed miserably to contain or correct the message before people began moving. The outcome was entirely predictable.

Approximately 60,000 migrants reportedly entered Ceuta in roughly 24 hours. Ceuta normally has around 85,000 residents, so the government allowed a sudden influx equal to about 70% of the city’s entire population, temporarily pushing the number of people in this small Spanish enclave toward 145,000 almost overnight. This was not a normal migration flow. It was the sudden transformation of an entire city caused by politicians who played with human incentives and never prepared for the consequences.

People swam around the Tarajal breakwater, breached barriers, and poured across sections of the border where Moroccan enforcement had weakened. At least 57 people reportedly died from drowning or in stampedes, although the early numbers varied, and those deaths belong on the conscience of every politician who sent the signal that reaching Spain would provide a new life.

Ceuta’s facilities were already collapsing before this mass influx. The city was caring for 472 unaccompanied minors by July 28 after receiving more than 250 in only two weeks, and officials admitted that the child-protection system was operating at 1,600% of its intended capacity.

Keep reading

What Does Glyphosate Have to Do With Cheap Factory Farm Meat? Plenty.

For years, Bayer and the biotech giant it purchased, Monsanto, have faced allegations that glyphosate, the active ingredient in its popular herbicide Roundup, causes cancer.

The saga has resulted in over 100,000 lawsuits, billions of dollars in settlement funds, a U.S. Supreme Court case and several actions by the Trump administration.

But amidst the flurry of legal activity, few have stopped to ask a fundamental question: Why are we spraying so much glyphosate in the first place?

The answer, in many cases, is animal agriculture. In the U.S., a significant amount of applied glyphosate is used to grow crops to feed farm animals, not humans. While President Donald Trump has defended glyphosate as crucial to maintaining food security, that’s an overly broad characterization.

In truth, glyphosate has largely made meat production cheaper, as fewer weeds lower the cost of feed production for livestock. Some studies have found glyphosate also reduces greenhouse gas emissions from feed crops by enabling no-till agriculture.

In June, the Supreme Court issued a major ruling in favor of Monsanto regarding glyphosate. A Missouri gardener who’d been using Roundup for about two decades developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and sued Monsanto for not including a cancer risk warning label on its Roundup products, arguing that it breaks a state failure-to-warn law.

The lower court ordered the company to pay him over a million dollars in damages, but the Supreme Court overturned that ruling, citing the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).

Under FIFRA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has final authority, superseding states, over what pesticide product labels are required to say.

Because the EPA had already ruled that glyphosate isn’t a carcinogen and therefore doesn’t require a cancer warning, the Supreme Court overturned the state court’s determination that Monsanto erred by not including such a warning on Roundup sold in Missouri.

Keep reading

Edmonton Police urge citizens to snitch on their neighbours for deportation talk

You typed a comment about Canada’s broken borders, and someone reported it as hate. According to the Edmonton Police Service (EPS), that’s an investigatory offence, even if it’s not a crime.

Last week, the Edmonton Police Service (EPS) posted a dramatic video overlaid with censored online comments: “Send them back home.” “Canada needs deportation.” “Hang him.”

The accompanying message declared: “Online hate isn’t ‘just a comment.’ It hurts real people and harms real communities. Hate has no home here.” Viewers were then directed to a ‘hate’ reporting portal.

While the post has since been deleted after massive public backlash, the timing is no coincidence.

It follows Bill C-9, the Combatting Hate Act, which received Royal Assent on June 18, 2026, with key provisions having come into force on July 18.

The legislation strengthens Criminal Code hate-propaganda rules, defines “hatred” as an “intense and extreme” emotion of vilification and detestation, creates a new offence for displaying certain terrorism or hate symbols, establishes a stand-alone hate-crime offence, and criminalizes intimidation or obstruction near places of worship, schools, and cultural sites.

EPS wasted no time in jumping on the new laws’ bandwagon with their video that blurred the line between actual criminal hate speech and everyday political opinion, while soliciting reports of non-criminal “hate-motivated incidents.”

Conservative MP and lawyer Roman Baber pushed back hard. “No, Edmonton Police, you have no jurisdiction to limit online speech unless a criminal law is broken,” he wrote in a widely shared post.

“The criminal offence of hate speech is limited to the definition articulated by the Supreme Court almost 40 years ago. Not what others find offensive.”

Keep reading

Father Shoots His Daughter’s Alleged R*pist After Posing as Her on TikTok – Then He is Charged By Authorities and Given a Higher Bond than the P*dophile

A loving Ohio father who was furious over a monster sexually assaulting his daughter took a unique approach to put a stop to the abuse, but is now paying a price.

As WBNS reported on Tuesday, Diego Montoya Gonzalez was shot by a 11-year-old girl’s father last month at their Grove City home after the child’s mother discovered video footage of her being r*ped.

The day after the footage was found, the child’s father posed as his daughter on TikTok to lure Montoya Gonzalez back to their home. Then, he shot him twice.

The dad said he acted in self-defense, claiming he only wanted to ‘beat up’ Montoya Gonzalez but saw him reach for a gun first.

But the dad’s daring act to save his innocent girl comes at a legal cost: WBNS reveals that he is being charged with felonious assault. His bond was set at $100,000.

Many Americans would certainly consider this decision by the authorities outrageous, especially since he was trying to protect his child.

Like WBNS, The Gateway Pundit will not identify the father to safeguard the little girl’s privacy.

Keep reading

Wisconsin Appeals Court Counters County: Upholds Foster Parents’ 2A Rights

Wisconsin’s Court of Appeals District III (CAD III) countered Washington County’s gun control rules for foster parents, rebuking the county for some of the controls and completely erasing others.

The ruling, issued in Lafferty v. Pertl, was handed down July 31, 2026. The case centers on Brian and Katie Lafferty and their fight to retain their Second Amendment rights while serving as foster parents.

The appeal to CAD III was made after a circuit court granted summary judgement against the Laffertys procedurally.

The Laffertys have been seeking to exercise their state and federal constitutional rights for five years while the Wisconsin Department of Children and Families (DCF) and Washington County Human Services Department (the County) have dithered, moved the goal posts, and changed the rules of the game every step along the way.

CAD III then observed that while some of the gun controls have been amended and done away with, the mandate that “foster parents’ firearms be stored unloaded as a condition of obtaining a foster parent license” still exists and “violates both the federal and state constitution.”

Moreover, The Washington Times pointed out that CAD III was not pleased with the way Washington County had been tardy in informing the appeals court it had removed some of its gun control and CAD III subsequently “scolded the county for playing games with the courts over the changes.”

Keep reading