CIA Prepares Criminal Referral of Tucker Carlson, as Israel and its Loyalists Demand His Arrest

On Friday morning, I taped an appearance on Tucker Carlson’s program to discuss the ongoing Iran War, growing Israeli influence in the U.S., and proliferating attacks on free speech in the West in the name of shielding that one foreign country from critique (I presume it will air in the next few days). Perhaps the most notable part of our conversation was what Tucker told me prior to the cameras rolling.

Tucker said he had learned from several high-placed sources — and he obviously has many within the Trump administration — that the CIA was preparing a criminal referral about him to the DOJ. The subject of the agency’s report of suspected crimes: conversations he allegedly had with Iranian officials and others in Iran prior to the start of the Trump/Netanyahu war. The clear implication was that Tucker had committed acts of subversion or even treason by speaking to Iranians in advance of the war that was about to be launched on their country.

Despite how innately shocking this claim is, I had and still have zero doubt that Tucker was telling the truth about what he heard. I have known him for many years, spent much time talking to him both in front of a camera and away from one, and never once has he lied to me or mislead me. Tucker has been in public life as a journalist and media figure since his 20s. There have been many harsh criticisms launched against him during those decades, many of which — as he will be the first to tell you — were ones that were quite valid.

Notably, many of the harshest attacks on Tucker came from me during my first decade after becoming a journalist (last year, Tucker discussed our friendship in a podcast conversation Chris Cuomo and he noted that, during the War on Terror and his ongoing war cheerleading, “nobody was meaner to me than Glenn Greenwald”; Cuomo said the same was true of him).

Keep reading

Texas Could See A Spike In Raids On Hemp Businesses Under New Rules, Industry Advocates Fear

Dallas attorney Chelsie Spencer specializes in making sure Texas businesses that sell hemp-derived THC products know how to stay in compliance with state and federal rules and regulations, an area that can be very confusing. She offers them a monthly service where her law firm rigorously vets distributors and helps to independently test their products to ensure they are safe and legal to sell in her clients’ stores.

“They pay us a phenomenal amount to stay compliant,” Spencer said.

That is why when Spencer learned that one of her North Texas clients had been raided by local police and the Drug Enforcement Administration, and his home surrounded, like he was a major narcotics dealer, she was shocked.

“They took everything from my client…his children’s cellphones, every computer in the house, took all the vehicles, seized all assets, and froze all cash,” Spencer said of the raid that occurred in July.

Since August 2024, local and federal law enforcement agencies have raided more than 15 businesses across the state that were accused of selling consumable hemp products that had illegal levels of THC, according to attorneys for these cannabis retailers. During these raids, law enforcement officials seized products and cash that businesses have still not recovered, and customers were scared away. Many of those retailers have not yet been found guilty of any crime, according to their attorneys.

“You always see the headlines about the raids, but you never see these huge headlines about charges and indictments,” said Andrea Steel, a Houston attorney for several THC businesses.

Even though they have affected a small fraction of 8,000 hemp retailers registered in Texas, these raids by law enforcement agencies have ramped up over the last two years to help some lawmakers build public support for banning hemp-derived THC products, Steel said. Over the summer, Gov. Greg Abbott (R) vetoed a bill the Legislature passed to ban hemp-derived THC and told state agencies to better regulate those THC products instead.

But, she said her clients fear these types of raids will continue because the new regulations being considered could create THC limits that will be nearly impossible to meet, shuttering THC businesses and deterring businesses from selling THC products.

“The same number of raids are occurring after the veto as before. In fact, there will likely be an increase in raids once the new rules and regulations are finalized because one of them is an increase in licensing fees for enforcement; they are going to need to justify that,” she said.

Law enforcement agencies deny that these raids were politically motivated. They have said these raids were based on concerns that these retailers were selling dangerous products, especially to children, and engaging in other unscrupulous activities such as money laundering, according to a news conference from Allen police, as well as a joint one between Temple and Belton police departments. Allen Police Chief Steve Dyes, whose department raided at least a dozen businesses and warehouses since 2024, was a fixture at the Texas Capitol during the legislative session, warning lawmakers that the hemp industry was corrupt and couldn’t be trusted.

Keep reading

Christian Teacher Fined $750,000 for Refusing to Agree That There Are More Than 2 Genders – Persecution in the First World

At this point, Canada hasn’t just done away with common sense. It’s dumped gasoline on it and set it ablaze for the world to see.

For example, former Chilliwack, British Columbia, school trustee Barry Neufeld must pay $750,000 for violating the Human Rights Code.

What exactly did Neufeld do for such a massive fine?

A Tribunal concluded he “invoked negative and insidious stereotypes about LGBTQ people, especially trans people, which denied their inherent dignity and, in some cases, reflected the hallmarks of hate against them as a group,” as the CBC reported Feb. 20.

“For five years, he publicly denigrated LGBTQ people and teachers and associated them with the worst forms of child abuse,” the Tribunal said further.

Neufeld had a complaint brought against him by Chilliwack Teachers’ Association and B.C. Teachers’ Federation after making Facebook posts, a speech, remarks at school board meetings, and comments to the media that the sentencing body felt would make those groups the target of hate.

One unnamed teacher said his comments had family members urging this person to reconsider career paths. The Tribunal said Neufeld “poisoned” the workplace.

He is a Christian, and his comments were relayed by The Christian Post. They aligned with historic Christian teaching on sexuality to which millions still subscribe today.

“It dawned on me that for a Christian, there are two approaches to take. The pastoral approach is one of compassion and empathy while firmly refusing to buy into their client’s delusional thinking. As one pastor said to a transgender person: ‘it is my responsibility to love you: but it is God’s job the [sic] change you’. However, while helping me grasp a better understanding of gender Dysphoria, the [issue] is so complex that it is hard to apply these insights in a debate at the political level, especially on Facebook,” Neufeld wrote.

He said his mission is to try “speaking out to the lawmakers in Victoria and trying to motivate lukewarm Christians who are sitting idly by as all of Society ‘Slouches towards Gomorrah.’”

Further, he spoke about the political ramifications of gender ideology, noting that it has “demonized people of faith who believe that God created humans male and female: In the Image of God.”

Keep reading

Canada’s Bill C-22 Mandates Mass Metadata Surveillance of Canadians

Canada’s Liberal government has introduced Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act, 2026, a surveillance bill that compels electronic service providers to store Canadians’ metadata for a year and hands police and intelligence agencies new tools to access it.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

The bill follows a failed first attempt, Bill C-2, which collapsed under the weight of near-universal criticism from opposition parties, rights groups, and the tech industry.

This is a mandatory data retention regime that forces companies to hold location data, device information, and other sensitive metadata on every Canadian, not just those suspected of crimes, ready for law enforcement retrieval via warrant. The logic is familiar: build the haystack first, search it later.

Keep reading

The Dark Side of AI: Innocent Grandmother Wrongfully Jailed for 6 Months After Facial Recognition Error

A Tennessee grandmother spent nearly six months behind bars in North Dakota, a state she had never even stepped foot in, after being wrongfully identified by AI facial recognition technology in a bank fraud investigation.

The Grand Forks Herald reports that Angela Lipps, a 50-year-old mother of three and grandmother of five from Tennessee, found herself trapped in a nightmare that began last July when U.S. Marshals arrested her at gunpoint while she was babysitting four young children. Fargo police had used facial recognition software to identify her as the primary suspect in an organized bank fraud case, despite the fact that she had never set foot in North Dakota.

The case began in April and May 2025 when Fargo Police Department detectives investigated several bank fraud incidents. Surveillance footage captured a woman using a fraudulent U.S. Army military identification card to withdraw tens of thousands of dollars from local banks. To identify the suspect, investigators employed facial recognition software, which incorrectly matched the woman in the videos to Lipps.

According to court documents obtained through an open records request, the detective assigned to the case reviewed Lipps’ social media accounts and Tennessee driver’s license photo after receiving the facial recognition match. In the charging document, the detective stated that Lipps appeared to be the suspect based on facial features, body type, hairstyle, and hair color. Notably, no one from the Fargo Police Department contacted Lipps to question her before filing charges.

Lipps was arrested on July 14 and booked into her county jail in Tennessee as a fugitive from justice. She faced four counts of unauthorized use of personal identifying information and four counts of theft in North Dakota. Held without bail due to her fugitive status, Lipps spent 108 days in the Tennessee jail before North Dakota officers transported her to Fargo on October 30.

“It was so scary, I can still see it in my head, over and over again,” Lipps said during an interview about her ordeal.

Keep reading

Florida Gives Tech Platforms Deadline for Age ID Checks

Florida’s attorney general has handed tech companies an ultimatum: build identity verification systems into your platforms by April 8, or his office starts filing lawsuits.

The deadline comes as a federal appeals court hears arguments this week on whether the state can legally force millions of users to prove who they are before accessing social media.

The law driving this, HB 3, bans anyone under 14 from social media entirely and requires parental consent for 14- and 15-year-olds. It also forces adult content sites to verify visitors are 18 or older.

Attorney General James Uthmeier gave tech companies 30 days to implement age restrictions and 60 days to deploy parental consent mechanisms. “It is the law of the land,” he said at an Orlando event on March 9. Non-compliance means litigation.

What Florida is actually mandating is a digital ID checkpoint at the entrance to the internet. The law doesn’t specify which verification methods qualify as “reasonable.” It doesn’t cap how long platforms can retain identity documents. It doesn’t limit what platforms can do with the surveillance infrastructure once it’s built. Florida gets the policy win.

Users hand over their documents. The data sits in corporate systems indefinitely, available for breaches, subpoenas, and purposes nobody has disclosed yet.

Uthmeier even named TikTok and Discord specifically. Discord’s attempt to introduce digital ID age verification has been met with much backlash, especially after a leak over over 70,000 government IDs. Uthmeier appears unconcerned.

NetChoice, co-plaintiff in the legal challenge, named this directly: the law creates a security risk by “mandating the surrender of sensitive information.” That’s the part Florida’s child-protection framing is designed to obscure. Every minor blocked from TikTok requires millions of adults to first prove they aren’t minors. The verification burden falls on everyone.

Keep reading

They censored debate on the censorship bill

On today’s episode of the Candice Malcolm Show, Candice is joined by our old friend Andrew Lawton, former independent journalist and current Member of Parliament for Elgin—St. Thomas—London South. Andrew sits on the Justice Committee, where they just shut down debate on Bill C-9, the Liberal government’s latest censorship bill.

They are literally censoring debate on a censorship bill! You can’t make this stuff up.

Andrew walks us through his attempts to amend the bill that removes religious exemptions for sincerely held views, which were shut down and rejected by the Liberal government. Andrew discusses the committee process and how the Liberals were able to push this through.

Candice and Andrew discuss the various attempts by the Liberal government to censor Canadians and crack down on free speech, which historically aims to silence their critics rather than address real concerns of hate and violence in Canada. On that topic, they discuss the terrifying string of terrorist intimidation currently aimed at Iranian dissidents and Jewish Canadians in Toronto, where Liberal laws have done nothing to protect these communities.

Andrew notes that C-9 would not have stopped these attacks, and notes the danger of having an estimated 700 members of Iran’s secret police force, the IRGC, active in Canada.

Finally, Candice and Andrew discuss the CBC, in light of the recent testimony from former host Travis Dhanraj. Andrew reconfirms the Conservative Party commitment to defund the state broadcaster.

Keep reading

British tourist, 60, ‘who filmed Iranian missiles’ in Dubai is facing two years in prison after being charged with cybercrime offence

A British tourist arrested after allegedly filming missiles hitting Dubai is facing two years in prison after being charged with a cybercrime. 

The 60-year-old Londoner, who was detained on Monday night, is said to have deleted the video immediately when asked. He insists he did not mean to break the law.

However, he has been charged alongside 20 others over videos and social media posts relating to recent Iranian missile strikes on the UAE, according to campaign group Detained in Dubai. 

The official allegation relates to ‘broadcasting, publishing, republishing or circulating rumours or provocative propaganda that could disturb public security’. The offence carries a maximum sentence of two years in prison. 

Dubai’s government heavily polices social media and responded to the outbreak of war by threatening jail against anyone sharing information that ‘results in inciting panic among people’.

Videos of drone and missile strikes were regularly shared on social media in the early days of the conflict, but these have largely disappeared and been replaced by a deluge of posts praising Dubai’s government. 

Once a tax-free haven attracting influencers from across the globe and thousands of Brits seeking warm weather and crime free streets, Dubai’s carefully crafted image has been shattered and some residents believe it is ‘finished’. 

The emirate, home to around 240,000 British expats including Rio and Kate FerdinandLuisa Zissman and Petra Ecclestone, has been targeted by constant Iranian missile and drone attacks as the regime strikes US allies in the Middle East. 

Dubai was hit by a fresh wave of drone attacks today, with a fire breaking out at a hotel in Creek Harbour in the early hours of the morning. Around noon, a building on the Sheikh Zayed Road was hit followed by a further incident in the Al Bada district. 

Keep reading

The App Store Accountability Act Is A Privacy Nightmare Disguised As Child Protection

Washington has discovered a familiar political trick: wrap a flawed policy in the language of protecting children and hope nobody reads the fine print. The latest example is the App Store Accountability Act, a bill championed by lawmakers who appear eager to regulate the internet without understanding how it actually works.

Supporters insist the legislation will protect kids online. In reality, it risks undermining privacy, violating constitutional protections, and creating a cybersecurity disaster in the process.

And remarkably, Congress is pushing forward with this even though federal courts have already signaled that this exact regulatory model is unconstitutional.

The App Store Accountability Act would require app stores to verify the ages of every user and share age information with app developers. On paper, that sounds straightforward. In practice, it would force companies to collect massive amounts of sensitive personal data simply to download everyday apps.

Want to download a weather app? Verify your age.

Want to install a calculator? Verify your age.

Want to read the news? Verify your age.

The practical result is obvious: app stores would be compelled to gather highly sensitive identity data on tens of millions of Americans and then distribute that information to countless third-party developers.

This could be one of the largest digital identity honeypots ever conceived.

Security experts have been warning about this for months. In fact, 419 cybersecurity and privacy academics from 30 countries recently signed an open letter warning that large-scale age verification systems are “dangerous and socially unacceptable” because they create enormous new attack surfaces for hackers and data thieves.

The logic is simple. If every app download requires age verification, that means sensitive identity data must be stored, transmitted, and accessed across thousands of services. Instead of limiting the spread of personal information, the bill effectively multiplies it.

For cybercriminals, it would be a dream target.

Keep reading

TDF sounds alarm over imminent passage of Bill C-9

Proposed “Combatting Hate Act” expands the legal definition of hatred and removes key free expression safeguards in the Criminal Code.

The House of Commons has closed debate on Bill C-9, the “Combatting Hate Act.” The Bill expands and codifies the definition of “hatred,” departing from the Supreme Court’s strict requirement of “vilification and detestation.” It removes the longstanding good faith religious speech protections for sincerely held religious opinions and expressions based on religious texts in the Criminal Code and eliminates the requirement for Attorney General consent before charging individuals with certain hate crime offences. The Bill also creates a new offence that applies when an underlying offence—even a non-criminal one—is motivated by hatred, potentially doubling the penalties for the underlying act.

The Bill has faced opposition from civil liberties groups and religious organizations. TDF was invited to testify before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and filed a brief outlining its serious misgivings. 

“Ironically, the government has moved to end debate on issues of public concern for a bill that would end debate on issues of public concern. The Bill empowers prosecutors to bring charges based on the merest suggestion that the impugned conduct is motivated by an ill-defined concept of “hatred,” massively increasing potential jail time and legal jeopardy for defendants. In our experience, these types of offences tend to be laid against marginalized and working-class people rather than powerful elites and political insiders. However, all Canadians can expect greater digital censorship and increased online police surveillance if the Bill becomes law. We only have to look at the UK example, where police make approximately 12,000 annual arrests for online “hate incidents” under similar legislation.” 

The Bill now moves to a vote at the justice committee. After that, it will proceed to the report stage and third reading before advancing to the Senate.

TDF will continue to oppose the Bill and all attempts by the government to censor Canadians.

Keep reading