Blog

NYC Democrat Socialist Candidate Darializa Avila Chevalier Wants to ABOLISH Prisons and OPEN America’s Borders — Deletes Thousands of Radical Tweets Before Tuesday’s Primary

The far-left challenger backed by NYC’s Communist Mayor Zohran Mamdani tried to scrub her record, but the receipts are devastating.

New York’s 13th Congressional District heads to the polls tomorrow in a Democratic primary that could hand a radical open-borders, abolish-prisons extremist a major platform in Congress.

Darializa Avila Chevalier, a 32-year-old democratic socialist and Justice Democrats-backed organizer, is challenging longtime Rep. Adriano Espaillat.

She’s been endorsed by far-left NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani and has positioned herself as the future of the Democrat Party in Upper Manhattan and the Bronx.

But newly uncovered deleted tweets from her old account (@darializabonet) — over 3,600 posts and reposts from 2018 to 2022 — reveal exactly who she really is.

In September 2021, she reposted this gem:

“A world without borders—just like a world without prisons or police—is possible, necessary, and the only moral way forward.”

She also amplified calls to “literally, abolish the border” and declared that “all deportation is wrong.”

She pushed for zero deportations and full open borders while the rest of the country was already suffering under Biden-era chaos.

During the 2020 riots, she doubled down on abolishing police entirely:

“F**k you. We’re gonna defund and abolish. You don’t get to water down our movements.”

And:

“No. It means ending policing full stop. Period. No more police at all ever.”

Other deleted posts praised seizing private property from landlords, nationalizing industries, and openly flirted with communism.

When confronted, Chevalier claimed the posts “did not reflect who she is today.” Too late. The mask is off.

Keep reading

CIA Official Confirms Agency Flip-Flopped Over COVID-19 Origins Over Five-Day Period

Over the span of five days in 2021, the CIA abruptly changed its opinion on the origins of COVID-19 from a laboratory to neutral, a newly released document confirms.

Originally, CIA analysts concluded that COVID-19 likely came from a high-level laboratory in Wuhan, China located near where the first cases were detected in late 2019, senior CIA officer James Erdman III told lawmakers in May. Over the span of five days in 2021, however, Edman says the agency changed its stance to ‘neutral.’ 

Then in September of 2024 during a private briefing between intelligence officials and members of Congress, Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-OH) inquired as to how the agency came to the conclusion that lab-origin vs. natural origin were about equal, according to yesterday’s document release by outgoing DNI Tulsi Gabbard. 

In response, an unnamed CIA employee told Wenstrup that “he made the call to stop the shift to lab because [redacted] had come in the day before they were ready to publish which made them back off the call,” according to a summary of the briefing compiled by an intelligence official. 

As the Epoch Times notes further, officials said in a declassified assessment based on information through August 2021 that only one agency – which was not the CIA, based on details since made public – favored a lab origin for COVID-19.

An updated assessment released in mid-2023 states that the CIA was unable to determine the origin of COVID-19 because both the lab and natural origin theories “rely on significant assumptions or face challenges with conflicting reporting.”

The CIA said in 2025 that a lab origin for COVID-19 was “more likely.” The Trump administration maintains that COVID-19 came from the lab in China.

More on Changes

A whistleblower in 2023 told members of Congress that the CIA team tasked with analyzing the origins of COVID-19 favored a lab origin, but that after the team was paid, it changed its position.

The CIA at the time denied paying analysts to reach specific conclusions.

Erdman, the senior CIA official, told a Senate panel in May that he was on a team investigating how intelligence agencies handled the COVID-19 pandemic and that the CIA declined to provide documents the team had requested that may have shed light on the change.

Erdman said that the team found the shift happened after Dr. Anthony Fauci, at the time the head of the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases – which provided funding for the lab in Wuhan – briefed intelligence officials and suggested to officials that they talk to specific scientists, including researchers who wrote a paper with which Fauci and the institute’s head secretly assisted.

The paper, called “Proximal Origin,” purported to rule out a laboratory origin.

Wenstrup also asked intelligence officials in the 2024 briefing about a white paper that National Center for Medical Intelligence analysts compiled as a rebuttal to the “Proximal Origin.” The authors of the white paper felt their conclusions were ignored by intelligence officials, they informed Wenstrup.

A representative for the center was not prepared for the questioning, “which annoyed Wenstrup,” according to the briefing summary.

Fauci Briefed Intelligence Officials

Fauci briefed intelligence officials on June 4, 2021, and promoted the idea that COVID-19 had a natural origin, according to another briefing summary released by Gabbard.

Fauci “recommended that [intelligence officials] take a look at Tulane’s paper on two lineages from two separate markets,” the summary states. “To Dr. Fauci, this paper’s findings were a clear indication of natural origins of COVID-19.”

Fauci also “reminded the group that even for SARS, it took 12 years to make the link to a bat even though it only took 4 months to identify the natural reservoir” and that “we still haven’t identified source/origin of Ebola,” which is believed to have a natural origin, according to the summary.

Fauci, who has not responded to requests for comment, told lawmakers during a hearing in 2024 that he did not talk about viral research related to COVID-19 with intelligence officials.

“After the investigations began about COVID, I was briefed by intelligence agencies about possibilities of there being activities going on in different laboratories,” he said.

In another readout of the 2021 briefing, Fauci was said to have suggested intelligence officials connect with three scientists whose names were redacted.

“All three … have advocated for features of the virus that they judge to be consistent with a natural origin,” the readout states.

An email disclosed that one of the scientists was Kristian Andersen, a Scripps Research researcher who coauthored the “Proximal Origin.”

Andersen said in private messages with coauthors that COVID-19 may have been engineered before the paper was published. He has said that further analysis of the virus altered his and others’ views.

“Dr. Fauci was the behind-the-scenes adviser who, alongside his hand-picked so-called experts, pushed the intelligence community to endorse a natural animal origin to hide his dangerous gain-of-function research that he funded using taxpayer dollars,” Gabbard said in a video statement posted to X on June 18.

“All of this in a deliberate attempt to cover up the truth and shift the blame and attention away from Fauci’s own actions.”

Keep reading

Absurd! Stanford Education Initiative Funds AI ‘Labor Equity’ Project for Illegals

In the latest absurd left-wing Globalist initiative, Campus Reform is reporting “The Stanford University Graduate School of Education’s ‘Equity in Learning Initiative’ has awarded 11 seed grants for 2026, including one dedicated to researching how Artificial Intelligence can achieve ‘labor equity’ for ‘undocumented migrant adults.”

In other words, DEI is back at Stanford and is helping illegal aliens who shouldn’t be in America.

“The grants appear under the heading of ‘Tequity in Learning’—a combination of ‘technology’ and ‘equity’—on the Stanford Accelerator for Learning’s website. The Stanford Accelerator for Learning is housed under the Graduate School of Education.”

Among these outrageous open borders pro-illegal projects are “Toward a Black Geographic Approach to Education Research: A Participatory Mapping Project” and “An Integrated AI/Physical Platform to Dismantle Inequities in Biotechnology Education.”

This is illegal according to Federal executive orders, yet somehow these universities remain committed to illegal aliens and DEI.

“Goldwater Institute reports have shown that faculty in schools of education often pursue politicized ‘scholarship’ that focuses on indoctrinating students in ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ (DEI) rather than exploring how to better teach math and reading,” according to a conservative watchdog group.

With reading scores at pathetic levels, one would hope schools would focus on basic academics, yet the evidence shows DEI and illegal alien accommodations remain a priority for WOKE educators.

“The university eliminated a program to assist “underrepresented” groups in higher education in February. The fellowship had previously funded over 200 doctoral students who “contribute[d] to the diversity of their field or degree program.”

The bottom line is, if one is looking for a quality education, not brainwashing or being fed leftist talking points, the university is not for you. Sad but true.

Illegals must be deported, not elevated and given preferential treatment.

The university should not be a safe space for lawbreakers.

Stanford has a reputation for leaning conservative, apparently this is incorrect.

The academy must comply with federal law and not be a sanctuary space for illegal aliens or foreign criminals.

Keep reading

What’s missing from the Epstein files? Questions persist about unexplained redactions, missing documents, email gaps

When the Department of Justice released more than 3 million pages of documents under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, survivors, advocates and lawmakers quickly raised questions about an apparent discrepancy: the DOJ had said it collected more than 6 million pages of material during its investigation but was only releasing half that number.

The Justice Department tells CBS News it “has released every document required by the Epstein Files Transparency Act,” and maintains that those unreleased 3 million documents were either duplicative, unrelated to Epstein or protected by legal privilege.

But concerns persist about evidence that important documents are still being withheld. CBS News has analyzed the archive not only for what has been disclosed, but also for documents that appear to be absent. Our key findings include:

  • Questionable redactions, including public figures’ names
  • Most Epstein emails from older accounts not included in files
  • Missing email attachments
  • No record of Signal communications
  • Lack of massage scheduling records after 2009
  • Missing prison surveillance footage
  • Missing documents from DEA investigation into Epstein
  • Other potentially relevant materials from ICE, Treasury, CIA and other agencies were not included because the law only applies to DOJ records.

The Government Accountability Office recently announced it was launching an investigation into the way documents that were released had information blacked out. That move comes at the request of several members of Congress.

Keep reading

Lack Of Intellectual Diversity! Close To 100% of Dartmouth Faculty Donations Went to the Political Left During 2026 Midterms

In the latest not-so-shocking campus news, it has been reported at Campus Reform, “Faculty at Dartmouth College sent nearly every dollar of political donations during the midterm election cycle to Democrats and related liberal causes.  

This bad news shows Woke Ideology remains dominant on so-called “elite” campuses, and the universities continue to disrespect the American people.

“A Campus Reform analysis of Federal Election Commission data found that the New Hampshire-based Ivy League school’s faculty gave $119,865.93 to the left, representing 99.8 percent of total contributions.”

No doubt if this percentage went to Republicans or conservative causes, there would be outrage throughout the media and the so-called liberal intelligentsia.

According to this sadly hardly surprising report, “ActBlue, a Democratic fundraising platform, received the most money from donors, pulling in $80,369.91 across 3,219 donations from 279 individual donors.”

“WinRed, the Republican fundraising equivalent, received 10 donations from 3 donors for a total of $162.14.”

This news is pathetic but hardly shocking, as the university has become an incubator for left-wing radicalism.

“The top donors to the left included Paul Guyre, former professor in the Geisel School of Medicine, who gave $17,925, and Albert Mulley, the managing director of the school’s Global Health Care Delivery Science Program, who contributed $7,120.”

“Bethany Moreton, a faculty affiliate of the school’s Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies program, also donated $2,816 through 189 individual contributions.”

This all points to direct evidence that the professors have a liberal agenda and are intent on not educating but indoctrinating students.

Keep reading

BIZARRE: New York Times Celebrates Father’s Day With Cartoon Essay About a TRANS “Dad” Whose Daughter Says He “Was a Girl”

The New York Times marked Father’s Day by publishing exactly the kind of piece Americans have come to expect from the left-wing paper: a cartoon essay about a transgender “dad” explaining gender identity to a young daughter.

The piece, titled “To My Daughter, My Gender Was Never Complicated,” was published in the Times’ opinion section and presented as a personal parenting reflection. But the actual cartoons tell a much larger story about where elite liberal culture is trying to take the country.

In one cartoon, the narrator writes, “I’ve been living as a trans man since I was 18 years old.” Another panel says, “But when my wife and I had Elliot, I had to learn how to be a trans dad.”

The child in the comic repeatedly asks the obvious questions that woke adults pretend are complicated.

“How did you grow a mustache if you were a lady?” the child asks in one panel.

In another, the child says, “That’s what my dad used to be called.”

Another panel shows children playing on monkey bars. One child says, “You can’t grow a beard. You’re a girl.” The narrator’s daughter responds, “My dad did, and he was a girl.”

This is what The New York Times chose to elevate around Father’s Day.

Father’s Day used to be one of the least controversial holidays in American life. It was about honoring fathers, grandfathers, and the men who sacrifice for their families. It was about the importance of dads.

But in the world of The New York Times, even Father’s Day must be turned into a lesson on gender ideology.

The point of the piece is not simply to tell a family story. It is to normalize a worldview in which the most basic human realities are treated as outdated social constructs. Fatherhood is no longer necessarily connected to being male. Motherhood is no longer necessarily connected to being female. Children are expected to absorb adult identity politics and repeat them back to the world.

The most revealing part of the cartoon is that the child is not confused by reality. The child understands exactly what adults are trying to complicate.

Keep reading

Report: Rep. Ilhan Omar’s Husband Was a Business Failure in 2025, Living Off His Wife’s Salary

It looks like firebrand Rep. Ilhan Omar’s (D-MN) husband may be a “kept man” — a husband who is supported financially by his wife, enabling him to live comfortably without working.

The “Squad” House member’s husband, who once valued his venture capital and wine empire at up to $30 million, now claims he is making as little as $200 a year, according to a report Sunday by the New York Post.

The avowed socialist legislator reported that husband Tim Mynett, a political consultant, made no income last year from his main business, Rose Lake Capital, according to the lawmaker’s newly released 2025 financial disclosure report.

As a House member, his wife earns a base salary of $174,000 a year.

“The only money Mynett — who has nearly two decades of experience in DC — earned last year is a meager $200 to $1,000 from his defunct California-based wine business eStCru, which sold bottles such as ‘The Devil’s Lie‘ before going belly up in April,” according to the Post.

The Post scrutinized the disclosure, reporting:

Omar claimed the total value of the couple’s assets was between $20,000 and $125,000 for 2025, and their credit card and student-loan debt hovered between $30,000 and $100,000 — putting their net worth at negative-$80,000-$95,000, according to the report.

The head-scratching financial disclosure comes after the couple in 2024 reported sudden ballooning wealth — from close to nothing to between $5 million and $30 million — sparking intense public scrutiny.

The Minnesota representative, as Breitbart News and other outlets reported in April, blamed the report of such massive wealth on an “accounting error.”

Keep reading

FCC Wants to Kill Burner Phones By Forcing Telecoms to Get All Customers’ IDs

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) wants to make it effectively impossible for people to buy what many call burner phones—a phone not explicitly linked to your identity at the point of purchase—which would impact privacy-conscious people, to domestic abuse survivors, to journalists, and many more. The FCC plans to do this by legally forcing the country’s telecoms to store a wealth of personal information about essentially all phone customers, including a government issued identification number and their physical address, alarming privacy advocates and civil rights activists who compare the measures to those from authoritarian countries where it can be difficult to buy a mobile phone plan without giving up your identity.

The proposed change would drastically shake up how people obtain phone plans in the U.S., and have all sorts of privacy and cybersecurity knock-on effects. The FCC is proposing the data collection partly as a way to combat scammers, with telecoms being required to collect other information on business and foreign customers like the intended use case of their bulk phone plan purchase and their IP address. But the changes would mean telecoms collect data on all new and renewing customers, and the FCC provides a long list of other things that the collected data could help authorities with.

“For decades, civil libertarians have looked overseas at authoritarian countries where the government requires people to register to get a mobile phone to ensure they can be tracked. We never thought that would happen here,” Jay Stanley, senior policy analyst at the American Civil Liberties Union’s (ACLU) Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project told 404 Media in an email. “But make no mistake: with this rulemaking, the government is contemplating taking away people’s ability to get a burner phone, which will hurt low-income people, domestic violence victims, and anyone else who cares about their privacy.”

In a synopsis of the proposed changes, the FCC writes, “Specifically, we seek comment on requiring originating providers to, at a minimum, obtain and retain the name, physical address, government issued identification number, and an alternate telephone number of any new and renewing customer before granting access to its services.” The goal of collecting this data, the FCC writes, is to deter some scammers from getting onto a telecom network in the first place, and so “enforcers will be better able to identify the scammers when they do.” The FCC compares the changes to the sort of data collected by banks to prevent money laundering.

One section stresses that the newly collected data would help “law enforcement to more easily identify callers that use the network to perpetuate crimes by ensuring that voice providers have accurate and complete customer information.” It goes on to ask if the data would help identify people buying and selling illicit goods; the investigation of “fraud, espionage, or influence operations that undermine national security”, and “address abuse in text messaging networks.”

“Criminals continue to leverage the anonymity provided by phone calls and texts to defraud Americans and exploit communications networks to further other crimes,” one section reads.

At the moment, the FCC is seeking comments about its proposed changes, with interested or concerned parties—think telecom companies, law enforcement, or privacy advocates—able to weigh in. But the intention of the FCC is clear: the agency wants telecoms to be legally obligated to collect much more personally identifying information on new and returning customers, linking them directly to their phone number and phone usage data. The FCC also asks whether the amount of data collected should change depending on whether a customer is seeking a prepaid or a postpaid service plan.

Multiple privacy and technology experts strongly pushed back against the proposed changes. “This proposal by the FCC will do little to combat scams and robocalls, since most people doing that will have no trouble creating fake documentation or identities,” Cooper Quintin, security researcher and senior public interest technologist with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), told 404 Media. “Given this administration’s crackdown on free expression, protest, immigrants, and women’s health we have trouble seeing this as a bold attack on freedom of communication. They want to take away our ability to make an anonymous phone call.”

Eric Null, the director of the Privacy & Data Project at the Center for Democracy & Technology, told 404 Media in an emailed statement “To address the scourge of illegal robocalls, the FCC has unfortunately proposed to force every wireless subscriber in the nation to sacrifice their privacy and give up significant personal details before receiving or renewing a wireless line. While some carriers already collect such details, there are specific circumstances where a person may need privacy and anonymity when seeking a cell phone, including if that person is a victim of domestic violence, or is a journalist or whistleblower. This proposal represents a loss of privacy across the board, and from an agency whose remit includes protecting privacy. The FCC might let a few bad apples spoil the whole bunch.”

Cape is a privacy-focused telecom company that limits the amount of data it collects on its customers. John Doyle, the company’s CEO, told 404 Media in an emailed statement “We hate robocalls and support eliminating them, but entrusting telecom carriers to effectively create a nationwide ID registry for every American with a phone is not the solution. Mobile carriers have been breached time and again because the incentives to secure trillions of dollars of legacy architecture aren’t there. Further enriching compromised telecom datasets with government ID, physical addresses, and alternate phone numbers harms our security rather than improving it.”

Given this proposal is in the comments stage, the FCC has many questions it is hoping to receive information on, such as whether “renewing” customers should be only those new to the provider, or those switching plans with their current telecom; or whether they should not allow the use of P.O. boxes or shared office locations as the required “physical address.”

The FCC did not respond to 404 Media’s request for comment. The proposal is open to comments until June 25.

Keep reading

Report: Ruben Gallego Used Campaign Donations for Babysitting and Luxury Family Trips, Including Disneyland, Disney World, Super Bowl

Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) repeatedly used campaign cash for child care and luxury outings with his family since launching his campaign for Senate in 2023.

That according to a report Sunday by Politico that scrutinized the senator’s campaign finance records and spoke with an unnamed source familiar with the lawmaker’s spending.

The Arizona Democrat used his leadership political action committee (PAC) to fund recent trips to Miami, Chicago, Disneyland, and Disney World with his family, according to the report.

Federal Election Commission records also show Gallego tapped his PAC and his main campaign committee for more than $18,000 in reimbursements for child care since 2019, including paying his wife’s mother $400 for babysitting.

Gallego also used a joint campaign account with disgraced former Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) to attend the 2023 Super Bowl in Arizona with his wife, Sydney, according to the political news outlet.

According to Politico:

Federal lawmakers can legally use campaign committee funds for travel, food, events and even child care, as long as those funds are not for “personal use,” meaning they may not cover activities that would exist irrespective of the campaign, according to the FEC. Leadership PACs are not even beholden to that “personal use” rule, meaning lawmakers have broad latitude to use the money they raise as long as it has some fundraising function. Ruben Gallego has leaned into that leeway, with his three children, Sydney Gallego, her mother and their full-time au pair frequently joining the senator on donors’ dime, according to the person, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly about the situation.

“He just spends his campaign account like it’s his personal slush fund,” the source told the outlet. “He’s using campaign cash to live a luxury lifestyle.”

Gallego appeared unconcerned about donor funds being used to pay for family travel or child care and did not dispute the numbers.

“This is not breaking news,” he said in a statement to Politico. “With the rising costs of child care and the burden it has on the budgets of American families, Democrats and Republicans in Congress and the White House alike regularly travel with their wives and children, as is permitted by the FEC.”’

Gallego is reportedly considering a presidential run in 2028.

The source familiar with the senator’s spending habits told the outlet there was concern among some of Gallego’s aids that he would fail the required vetting to be president or vice president.

Keep reading

Kamala Harris Says Dems Should “Exploit” Packing SCOTUS to Give Puerto Rico and DC Statehood, “Look At” Abolishing Electoral College – Admits Why She Actually Lost in 2024

Failed Presidential candidate Kamala Harris did an interview with disgraced ex CNN host Don Lemon on Friday, where she admitted her radical agenda for the White House if she runs again, which is likely. 

Harris signaled in April that she may run for president again.

She told Lemon that she wants to pack the Supreme Court with four more justices to pass far-left policies like DC and Puerto Rico statehood, which would give the Democrats four more Senate seats.

On the Supreme Court, she said, “I’ve been saying for quite some time I think that we absolutely have to explore what we need to do because of this Supreme Court and what it has done to destroy so many of the elements of the Constitution that were designed to protect, in particular, the minority, those who were marginalized, including expansion of the Supreme Court.”

“I absolutely believe that we should be exploiting that, and the idea of 13, I agree, because there are 13 circuit courts, 13 justices. I think that we should be looking at statehood for Puerto Rico and DC. I think we should be looking at when we win the majority in the House and in the Senate for the Senate Judiciary to have and to create rules that include that if there is a nominee to the Supreme Court before them, who is clearly lying that there be some consequence, and that we say to Democrats, at the very least, who are members of Senate Judiciary, that you need to be prepared to actually put some rules in place and enforce them if people come before you and are breaking the ethical rules of responsibility around taking an oath and telling the truth to that committee,” she continued.

“I think there’s a lot of work that we need to do, including considering an expansion of the court, yes.”

Keep reading