Blog

NY Times Says Christian MLB Players Wearing Bible Verses Will Cause Mass ‘Abuse’ Of Gay People

During a Friday pride night game, several San Francisco Giants pitchers wrote Bible verses on their gay-ified hats. One player made clear there was “no hate at all. It’s just what I stand for, and what I stand on: I believe in God.” The same player added that the rainbow is a symbol of God’s covenant and promise and that he’s ultimately thankful to live in a country where free expression and speech are protected.

But apparently writing a Bible verse on his baseball cap will actually cause gay people to be abused and even incite gays to kill themselves — so says The New York Times’ subsidiary, The Athletic.

Grant Brisbee said the Bible verse inscriptions on the hat were “tone-deaf” and “made the night about ‘us versus them.’”

Brisbee then made the fantastical claim that, apparently, writing a Bible verse on your ball cap will cause gay people to suffer actual harm.

“Without the support of their community at large, LGBTQIA+ individuals are much more likely to be told that they are without value,” Brisbee wrote. “They are likelier to be abused, to self-harm, to get kicked out of their homes, to be bullied, to be assaulted. They are at risk because of a society that still doesn’t always accept them, even after decades of progress.”

There is legitimately zero evidence that baseball players writing Bible inscriptions on their hats will cause any harm, abuse, or the assault of gay persons (or anyone for that matter).

What Brisbee is arguing is that if a player expresses religious beliefs that diverge from the left-wing LGBTQ orthodoxy, then real people could be harmed. At that point the argument is that Christianity causes violence and therefore Christianity is bad unless of course you practice your faith in a way that Brisbee deems fit (he waxes poetic about how the right type of Christianity apparently demands affirming the sexual preferences of others). His argument also becomes: if fans don’t enthusiastically celebrate pride night, they’re contributing to suffering. If someone doesn’t affirm the mental illness of a man thinking he’s a woman, they’re creating a dangerous environment.

Keep reading

UK police officer uses AI to create evidence in multiple criminal cases

Law enforcement agencies across the world have rushed to integrate AI into their investigations, promising faster arrests and higher case closure rates. The rising number of wrongful arrests attributed to AI facial recognition systems, however, tells another story: that speed and accuracy are two entirely different things.

But while false arrests due to facial recognition software can easily be blamed on glitchy technology, an even more disturbing pattern is starting to emerge, as AI-wielding officers don’t just misidentify suspects, but use the technology to fabricate evidence.

Over the weekend, the BBC reported that officials in Derbyshire County, England, are investigating one law enforcement officer who’s alleged to have used generative AI to “create evidential material in a number of cases.”

The yet-unnamed officer has not been arrested, but has been suspended from duty pending the outcome of the investigation, which is reportedly being undertaken by Derbyshire police and the Crown Prosecution Service.

“A criminal investigation has been launched into an allegation of perverting the course of justice after the alleged use of AI systems by an officer to create evidential material in a number of cases,” a Derbyshire police spokesperson told the Financial Times.

It’s the first case of its kind in the UK, coming days after the country’s brand-new national PoliceAI centre issued guidance advising officers to stop using generative AI to prepare court statements due to the tech’s tendency to hallucinate answers.

“We’ve said to some police forces, ‘you can’t do that, because we haven’t gone through all the checks and balances’,” Alex Murray, head of the PoliceAI centre, told the Financial Times in an interview. “We need to slow it down a bit.”

While AI hallucinations have indeed found their way into police reports due to laziness – like the case of Utah police whose report claimed an officer transformed into a frog – the seriousness of the Derbyshire investigation suggests that’s unlikely to be the case here.

If anything, it sounds more like the Maine cops who were caught last year posting photographs of a “drug bust” that had clearly been tampered with using generative AI.

Keep reading

When A Hate Group Tries To Destroy You: Moms For Liberty Stands Against The SPLC

The Southern Poverty Law Center placed the conservative parents’ rights group Moms for Liberty on its “hate map” alongside the KKK, Antifa, and neo-Nazi organizations in 2023.

But last week in a House Judiciary Committee hearing on the SPLC, Rep. Tom Tiffany, R-Wis., vindicated Moms for Liberty by slamming Bryan K. Fair, the SPLC’s interim president and chief executive officer, for placing them on the map.

Tiffany asked Fair, “Why was it important for your organization to put the Moms for Liberty on a hate map?”

Fair responded, “Moms for Liberty is listed on our hate map because it demeans and vilifies people based on mutable characteristics,” he said, referring to biological sex.

Tiffany replied, “Moms for Liberty is not a racist organization. They may differ with you [regarding] gender mutilation for children … but I think that’s a fair debate to be having!”

The SPLC is a leftist advocacy group that claims to “dismantle white supremacy” and “eliminate economic inequality.” The organization started a “hate map” in 2000 to flag racist groups, but it now flags practically any organization that supports parental rights, Christianity, or opposes LGBT insanity and transgender mutilation surgery.

The SPLC has many Christian, conservative organizations besides Moms for Liberty flagged as “hate groups” on its website, leading Moms for Liberty chapter leader Alexandra Bougher to speak up on their behalf on The Vicki McKenna Show on iHeartRadio.

“People have been doxxed, swatted, lost their jobs … because of this hate map,” she said on the radio interview. “The fact that the [SPLC] has no remorse over it is disturbing.”

The hate map led to worse than a lost job in 2012 when a gunman stormed into the lobby of the Family Research Council, a conservative family and education non-profit. The gunman shot a security guard before being subdued. An FBI interrogation revealed that the shooter chose FRC after he found it on the SPLC’s hate map for being anti-LGBT.

“We as Americans should be able to disagree on things without being smeared or demonized … we don’t need to destroy someone’s life because we don’t see eye to eye,” Bougher said in the interview. The DOJ announced an 11-count indictment in April against the SPLC for fraud and false statements, and scheduled a federal trial for October. The DOJ found that the “SPLC is lying to everyone, saying that they’re warning people of hate, meanwhile funding the hate groups to make more money,” Bougher explained. “It’s absolutely sickening.”

The SPLC secretly funneled over $3 million to racist, extremist groups, including the KKK and the American Nazi Party, while simultaneously claiming to fight them between 2014 and 2023, according to the DOJ. “The objective of the scheme and artifice was to obtain money via donations through materially false representations and omissions about what the donated funds would be used for,” the DOJ stated.

Keep reading

Israel And Hezbollah Trade Fire In Southern Lebanon, Deaths On Both Sides, Israeli Media Goes After Trump, Vance Cancels Swiss Iranian Negotiation Trip As Violence Rages, Iran Says Deal In Jeopardy

Hezbollah fired missiles into Northern Israel yesterday, which were intercepted by Israeli missile systems. Israeli leadership responded angrily to the U.S.-Iran peace deal as the IDF continued operations in Southern Lebanon. Multiple Israeli soldiers were killed south of Beirut as Israeli forces continue to consolidate positions and go after Shia proxy army targets in the south. The IDF continues to be challenged by FPV drones, which are effective against armor and infantry in southern Lebanon.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz rages on Israeli TV:

“Nobody can tell us what to do, and we’ve proven it. The entire first line of Lebanese villages has been destroyed.  We are destroying all the houses. The residents will never see them standing before their eyes again.

“In Lebanon, the 200,000 residents who lived in the “security zone” are not returning.  Not one of them is returning.

“We are fighting there. We do not need al-Julani. Al-Julani, the terrorist in a suit, does not need to come and help us. We know Syria well. He is not going to help us in Lebanon. He should stay in Syria, not interfere with us, and not make us interfere with him.

“Do you know what really hurts the jihadists? Maybe it hurts them when you kill them personally, but they don’t care as much about that.  What really hurts them is when you take territory from them and destroy their homes—and that’s what we did.

“You remember the raids? They would go in and come out.  We go in, destroy, and do not leave. That’s what we’re doing now in Lebanon

“The IDF must be on the other side of the border, beyond the border, defending the State of Israel against jihadist organizations in Lebanon, in Syria, and in Gaza. We will not move from the “security zones”—not in Syria, not in Gaza, and not in Lebanon.

“Why are we on the other side in Syria?  Because we need to be there to protect ourselves against what we see in Syria.

“We are already in more than 60% of Gaza, and all of it is destroyed. It is destroyed above ground and underground. That is the difference in the approach we introduced.”

Keep reading

We’re At The ‘Free Speech Is Bad Actually’ Stage Of Multiculturalism Now

For years conservatives warned that multiculturalism and free speech are on a collision course. If a society starts treating every culture as equal and beyond criticism, then eventually you have to police speech — and apparently, Europe has decided to do just that.

French influencer Thaïs d’Escufon was allegedly assaulted in 2021 by a North African migrant who — according to d’Escufon — “present[ed] himself as Tunisian.” Two years after the alleged assault, d’Escufon said the main danger to women in France are “Black African and Arab men.” She said Tuesday that she is “facing an unsuspended prison sentence for my comments about the danger posed by immigrant men in France.”

It matters naught whether you agree with her argument (though it should be noted that migrant rape gangs in particular have been victimizing Europeans for years now). What’s important is whether people are allowed to criticize other cultures and immigration policy without potentially being tossed into the slammer.

This wouldn’t be the first time that Europe has punished people for free speech because they condemned the impact of multiculturalism. Eric Zemmour, a candidate for France’s presidential elections in 2022, was found guilty in 2016 for charges related to inciting racial discrimination when he said France had been the victim of an “invasion” of Muslims.

An Austrian woman was convicted in 2018 for calling the prophet Muhammed a pedophile. The woman was convicted for disparaging religion.

In fact, a member of Germany’s Alternative for Germany (AfD) party was convicted for incitement to hatred for using statistics (that were not disputed) to claim Afghan migrants were responsible for a disproportionate amount of sexual violence against women.

It’s an outcome that conservatives have warned about for decades.

In a 2008 column, Pat Buchanan warned: “Canada’s commitment to multiculturalism and the equality of all religions, races and cultures requires the silencing of those who do not believe all races, creed and cultures are equal. The dogmas of the Diverse Society dictate that the cherished rights of the Free Society be sacrificed on the altar of social tranquility.”

Keep reading

Despite Over 100 Deaths in Moderna’s mRNA Flu Trial – Committee Recommends that the FDA Move Forward with Approval

June 18, 2026: Moderna just announced that, “the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) voted 9-0 that the benefits of mRNA-1010, Moderna’s investigational seasonal influenza vaccine, outweigh its risks for the prevention of influenza disease in adults 50 through 64 years of age and in adults 65 years of age and older.”

This is despite the fact that Moderna reported 102 deaths in the mRNA group and 97 deaths in the ‘enhanced vaccine’ group.

102 reported deaths out of 35,965 mRNA injected study participants equate to a 0.3% fatal adverse event (death) rate in less than a year of being injected.

Adults aged 50-64 have a 0.015% of dying from the flu vs. 0.3% from a flu injection = a 20-fold (1900%) increase).

Adults 65 and older have a 0.05% chance of dying from the flu vs 0.3% from a flu injection = 6-fold (500%) increase.

Keep reading

Here’s Why Jennifer Newsom’s Charity Compensation Is Raising Red Flags

Questions surrounding the finances of California Gov. Gavin Newsom and his wife, Jennifer Newsom, continue to draw attention as federal investigators reportedly examine matters connected to the governor’s financial affairs.

During an interview, Katie Pavlich spoke with journalist Josh Boswell about his investigation into Jennifer Newsom’s charity and the financial questions that led him to examine the organization more closely.

“What made you look into Newsom’s wife in the first place, and what did you find?” Pavlich asked.

Boswell said longstanding questions surrounding the Newsoms’ finances prompted his review.

“Well, there are just always a lot of questions that seem to be swirling around the nuisance, and their finances have been for years, and so I thought, you know, this is a man who clearly is going to be running for president. This is worth looking at, you know, what their finances are, what the shape of them are,” Boswell said.

According to Boswell, his review of Jennifer Newsom’s charitable organization revealed compensation levels that stood out compared with similar nonprofits.

“And so when I had a look at Jennifer Newsom’s charity, I found that she was paying herself since 2012 $3.7 million and this is a lot of money when you look at the amount that the charity brings in, it’s sort of one to 1.7 million a year, and she’s paying up to a third of that to herself and her own company $300,000 a year,” Boswell said.

Boswell said he compared the compensation figures to other charities of similar size and found the payments ranked unusually high.

Keep reading

Illegal Alien Who Raped the Body of a Dead Man for 30 Minutes on NYC Subway Learns His Fate

A convicted illegal immigrant who sexually violated the corpse of a dead man on a New York City subway train for more than 30 minutes has been sentenced to five years in prison.

The disgusting case shocked New Yorkers and much of the country when details were first reported last year.

Now, Mexican national Felix Rojas, 44, knows his punishment.

According to the New York Post, a Manhattan judge sentenced Rojas on Wednesday to five years in prison for raping and robbing the body of Jorge Gonzalez, 37, aboard a train in April 2025.

Rojas reportedly sat silently during the sentencing hearing and made no comments.

The facts of the case are difficult to read. Prosecutors said Gonzalez boarded the train and later lost consciousness.

He died on a subway bench nearly three hours before Rojas arrived.

Instead of calling an ambulance or asking for help, Rojas chose a darker path.

According to prosecutors, he first noticed Gonzalez was motionless and then began touching and searching the dead man’s body.

He eventually pulled down Gonzalez’s pants and raped his corpse.

Court records cited by the Post said Rojas searched Gonzalez’s pockets and belongings throughout the assault.

According to the district attorney’s office, Rojas periodically stopped his deviant activities whenever the train approached stations or when other passengers entered the car.

When people boarded, he would sit down and pretend nothing was happening.

Prosecutors said the assault continued, and at one point, Rojas moved his victim onto the floor.

Keep reading

Colorado Gun Owners Sue Over New Law Allowing Warrantless Access to Dealer Records

A new Colorado law has raised the hackles of a coalition of gun owners in the state, leading them to challenge its constitutionality in federal court.

Signed into law on June 2 by Colorado Democratic Gov. Jared Polis, the Requirements for Firearms Dealers Act requires all gun sellers in the state to allow any “duly authorized peace officer” to inspect their sales records “at all times.”

The bill follows in the footsteps of 11 other states and Washington, D.C., by extending the state’s record-keeping requirements for firearms dealers to all retail transactions, including transfers. Dealers will be required to note the customer’s name, age, and address, as well as the firearm’s serial number, letters, make, and caliber. Failure to comply could result in a fine of up to $75,000, the loss of a dealer’s license, and up to a year in jail. 

Gun owners in the state are pushing back against this overreach. Ten days after Polis signed the bill into law, three firearms dealers and two firearms associations filed a joint civil suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado, arguing that the bill is a “warrantless-inspection scheme for firearms dealers” that violates the Fourth Amendment because it includes no stipulations for warrants or probable cause and no restrictions on time or frequency.

Colorado’s law would make it easier for law enforcement to engage in fishing expeditions. Under the law, a Colorado police officer could presumably demand that a dealer provide records of firearms sales for the last month, with no mention of a crime being committed or a suspect in mind. While the bill does prohibit law enforcement from creating or maintaining a firearms registry, that provision seems moot if firearms dealers are themselves forced to maintain the registry for cops. 

While the court challenge is ongoing, it’s difficult to see how Colorado’s law complies with the Supreme Court’s precedents on warrantless searches. 

In New York v. Burger (1987), the Court ruled that a warrantless search of a “closely regulated” industry violates the Fourth Amendment unless it satisfies three criteria: the state must have a substantial interest in regulating the industry; the warrantless inspections must directly serve that interest, be necessary for the regulatory scheme; and the statute must offer a constitutionally adequate warrant substitute, such as notification and limits on “time, place, and scope,” to “impose appropriate restraints” on an officer’s discretion. 

Colorado’s law might satisfy the first criterion. But it appears to fall short of the other two entirely, especially since the law is broad enough to allow sheriffs and campus security alike to inspect the records of any firearms dealer in the state.

Even when the law permits the government to inspect a business without a warrant—an administrative search—the Supreme Court ruled in Los Angeles v. Patel (2015) that the subject must be afforded a review by a “neutral decisionmaker” for the search to be constitutional. Colorado law does not provide firearms dealers with an opportunity for such a review before inspection.

Aside from the record-keeping provisions, the bill adds new administrative burdens for firearms dealers by requiring businesses in the state to provide the Department of Revenue with a “comprehensive security plan.” It also tasks the department with adopting rules on acceptable security measures that dealers must comply with. Those requirements will go into effect in October 2027.

State Sen. Cathy Kipp (D–Fort Collins), a cosponsor of the bill, told Complete Colorado the new law “builds on a new bureaucracy established in 2024” to stop “preventable shooting deaths” and reduce gun violence. But another outcome is far more likely: treating gun owners and firearm dealers like de facto criminals.

Colorado lawmakers have created an environment ripe for confrontation between law enforcement and legally armed Americans, all while violating Coloradans’ right to privacy.

Keep reading