WNBA PR Shuts Down Press Conference the Instant Sophie Cunningham’s Defense of Women’s Sports Comes Up

An Indiana Fever postgame press conference came to an abrupt end when a reporter attempted to ask about teammate Sophie Cunningham’s recent comments defending women’s sports.

The team’s PR director immediately cut off the session, sending players and the coach fleeing the podium.

Following the Fever’s win over the Portland Fire on Friday night, an Outkick reporter began a question with the words “Speaking of outside noise, Sophie came out with—”

PR director Jackie Maynard immediately interjected and declared, “We’re going to wrap up there.”

Players Aliyah Boston and Makayla Timpson quickly jumped out of their seats and left the room.

Boston offered a brief “Thank you. Have a good day,” while coach Stephanie White briefly stared at papers before following them out.

Keep reading

Christian Parents Sue Oregon After State Brands Them “Child Abusers” for Refusing to “Affirm” Daughter’s Transgender Identity

A Christian mother and her husband are fighting back after Oregon officials effectively branded them child abusers because they refused to “affirm” their teenage daughter’s transgender identity.

Nicole and David Calaway filed a federal lawsuit on July 15 against their daughter’s former therapist and multiple Oregon Department of Human Services officials, accusing them of violating the couple’s First and Fourteenth Amendment rights.

“It has destroyed our lives,” Nicole told The Daily Signal.

According to the lawsuit, Child Protective Services removed Nicole’s then-15-year-old daughter, identified as K.A., from the Calaways’ home on July 18, 2024.

The seizure occurred one day after Nicole and her daughter reportedly terminated the services of therapist Jennifer Forster. Court documents allege that Forster then contacted the child-abuse hotline after being encouraged by ODHS caseworker Rachel Woods.

Forster allegedly told authorities that Nicole had appeared “aggressive and angry” and intended to leave her daughter without mental-health support.

The Calaways contend those statements were false and created a “fabricated appearance of urgency” that Oregon officials used to remove K.A. from their home.

Keep reading

The Left Can’t Erase Moms And Dads, No Matter How Hard They Try

This past month, our organization, Them Before Us, put up a handful of billboards across the country with a message that has been uncontroversial for all of recorded history: “No child has two dads. No child has two moms.”

Within days, LGBT activists were organizing against them, trying to bully the billboard company, raising funds for counterprotests, and lobbing accusations at our organization, calling us a hate group. The collective outrage has now begun trending on X, drawing millions of views across platforms, thousands of comments, and tens of thousands of likes in just a few short days. All of that fury is aimed at a sentence that every person alive knows to be true, because every person alive arrived here through one biological mother and one biological father.

The rage begins to make sense once you understand why these words pose such a threat to a certain ideology. “Mother” and “father” are real words with real definitions that carry real responsibilities anchored to the creation of a child. If we turn “mother” and “father” into feelings, into roles anybody can claim or set aside, we allow adults to abdicate (or sell) their responsibility by way of this redefinition, detaching them from the children they have created. These detached children then sit in a legal limbo, waiting to be assigned to whichever adults the state sees fit. This transformation from a person who needs protecting to an asset that needs allocating is a project extremists across history have long dreamt about.

Children have always come into the world making a claim on the adults around them. If a parent takes home a child, refuses to care for her, and the child is injured as a result, we do not arrest the nurse who sent her home or the neighbor across the street. We arrest the mother or father, because built into how we define a child is a biological responsibility laid at the feet of the people responsible for her creation. That definition is how every child has always known who she is, whose she is, and what she is owed: to be known and loved by her mother and father.

Now, our billboard detractors were quick to recite a list they thought disproved biology: children growing up in divorced homes; those who no longer have a father or mother on earth due to death; and those said to have multiple mothers or fathers because of stepparents, blended families, or adoption.

Their concerns highlight an unfortunate reality: Millions of children do live without or apart from their biological parents. But every situation on that list is also a result of a circumstance nobody premeditated or desired. Society has long recognized this and even constructed a process in response to the worst of these tragedies, called adoption, which is a process for a child who has already lost his or her mother or father and sees those responsibilities pass to two vetted adults. Adoption honors the biological definition rather than undermining it, because it begins by admitting the child lost something.

On the other hand, this new regime of redefinition deliberately deprives a child of her mother or father before she is born, through purchased eggs, purchased sperm, and rented wombs. This is not a difference in degree, but in kind: a market in which the child is the product of adult manufacture and state assignment.

Just this past week, news broke that Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier was intervening in a surrogacy case that shows this ideology carried to its logical end. A single man in China rented the womb of a Florida woman, and when she gave birth to his triplets, he never came. Their birth was met with silence. The death of one of the boys from RSV complications was met with the same silence. For 20 months, the woman cared for the boys; then, the moment she moved to terminate his parental rights and adopt the survivors, the Chinese national hired a lawyer, who has since had the two boys pulled from the only woman they have ever known and placed in foster care while he fights to ship them to a country from which no court could ever bring them back.

Keep reading

Permission to work: the Crown sends three prosecutors to scrutinize Tamara Lich’s work at Rebel News

When the story of the Freedom Convoy is told, one name keeps surfacing at the centre of the storm: Tamara Lich. In the winter of 2022, as vaccine mandates and lockdown rules stretched into a third year, she was at the forefront with the truckers who drove on Ottawa and parked there. She became a symbol of resistance not because she sought it, but because the system made her one.

And the system still isn’t letting go.

Fresh from the longest mischief trial in Canadian history, indeed in the entire Commonwealth, Lich’s case was back before an Ottawa court. There is a live application before the court seeking to vary her sentence so she can travel more widely to work for Rebel News. Ezra Levant filed an affidavit describing the work she has done over the past six months. The Crown’s response? Three prosecutors, not one, not two, but three, lined up to cross-examine him on it. That is how far things have come: a journalist made to seek the court’s permission simply to travel for her job, and three government lawyers dispatched to argue about it. 

Step outside the Ottawa bubble and the picture changes entirely. Earlier in the month, Ezra and Tamara spent more than twelve hours driving through southern Alberta, from Okotoks to Lethbridge to Medicine Hat. Crowds gathered not because the press told them to, but because they wanted to. People came out in the heat when they could have been doing anything else, just to say hello.

Keep reading

Minority Report: FBI Seeks AI for Political Watch List

The FBI office in charge of maintaining the terrorist watch list is seeking an artificial intelligence system for pre-crime policing, according to procurement documents obtained by Reason. The request for information for vendors, posted by the FBI’s procurement division in March, solicits potential bidders for a project that would supercharge the Threat Screening Center (TSC) with new predictive AI capabilities—just as its focus moves from Islamist terrorism to domestic dissent.

“The solution must leverage existing enterprise datasets that include enriched or enhanced data elements with documented source attribution to develop predictive models. When new data is ingested, the system must analyze similarity, pattern alignment, and attribute correlation against existing records to predict where additional relevant information may be derived across federated systems,” the document reads, listing “Predictive Modeling Using Enhanced Data with Traceable Lineage” as one of six requirements. In other words, the TSC wants to use AI to help predict who might be a terrorist.

The FBI declined Reason‘s request for comment.

The TSC, originally called the Terrorist Screening Center, was founded in 2003. President George W. Bush’s Homeland Security Presidential Directive-6 ordered the FBI to combine all existing government terrorist watch lists into one center with a 24/7 staff on call to respond to queries from other law enforcement and intelligence agencies. Most of the hundreds of thousands of names on the TSC watch list are foreign citizens believed to be tied to jihadist organizations, with fewer than 10,000 Americans on the list at the beginning of President Donald Trump’s second term.

But the second Trump administration has renamed the TSC to focus on broadly defined “threats,” and oriented it toward groups the administration deems subversive—a change that has received little media coverage. Last year, the White House published National Security Presidential Memorandum-7 (NSPM-7), which instructed the entire national security apparatus to focus on incredibly broad threats, including “anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and anti-Christianity;…extremism on migration, race, and gender; and hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on family, religion, and morality.”

The FBI’s procurement request for predictive AI explicitly mentions NSPM-7, although the reference is likely connected to a 2017 directive of the same name that expanded intelligence sharing between federal agencies about watch-listed people and groups. Nonetheless, the TSC is actively involved in carrying out the mandates of the more recent NSPM-7: “TSC also supports law enforcement and other communities at the federal, state, local, tribal, and international partners as established by Homeland Security Presidential Directive 6 and more recently, National Security Presidential Memorandum 7,” the document reads. “To help carry out its mission, the TSC requires enhanced technical solutions that will assist its operational staff by providing automation of time-intensive, repeatable manual tasks entailing large volumes of data across multiple domains.”

Keep reading

Canada’s New “Hate” Law Is Already at People’s Doors

Royal assent came in June, the law landed in July, and by the end of the month somebody was standing on a porch asking about a post from three years ago.

Government officials in Canada are contacting people at their homes over social media posts written months or years ago, according to the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF).

The legal advocacy group says the reports began arriving after Bill C-9, the Combatting Hate Act, cleared Parliament. The law received royal assent on June 18 and came into force on July 18, expanding Canada’s “hate speech” offenses, raising penalties, and eliminating defenses that had limited prosecutions for what the state calls hate-related expression.

“We are receiving reports that some Canadians are being contacted at their homes by government officials about social media posts made months or even years ago,” the JCCF wrote. “These reports come after the passage of Bill C-9, the Combatting Hate Act, which expands Canada’s hate speech laws by creating new offences, increasing penalties, and removing certain legal safeguards that previously limited prosecutions for hate-related expression.”

Keep reading

Meltdown? The Real Reason Why The Media Hates Elon Musk

Some would say that Elon Musk is an enigma; a billionaire entrepreneur with a focus on green tech and environmental impact who used to support Democrat fixtures like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, only to become one of the progressive establishment’s biggest opponents.  What happened?

As Musk readily admits, the progressive movement changed and he did not.  One could argue that the progressive movement didn’t change, it just pulled the mask off and revealed the monstrous face underneath.  Either way, anyone who saw that ugly face during the despotic insanity of the pandemic era and refused to adapt and embrace it was deemed an “enemy of democracy”. 

Musk got a real good look and was clearly repulsed. 

After 2022 when Musk declared his total separation from the Democrats as the “party of division and hate”, the leftist media descended like so many flying monkey’s from a wicked witch’s castle.  The attacks have been relentless.  When Musk made a move to purchase Twitter and fundamentally disrupt the political left’s dominance of the social media landscape, they shrieked with rage and spit venom.  It was glorious.  

In a recent interview with The Economist the venom was on full display, but the tactics of media disinformation agents and provocateurs have become tired, repetitious, tedious.  You could see Musk’s exasperation with the exercise.  He’s heard all these leading questions and biased insinuations a thousand times before. 

Online and Swiss-owned far-left outlet Gizmodo published a hatchet job article covering the interview and described Musk as “melting down” over “normal questions”.  This kind of gaslighting from the left is standard, and the projection is palpable.  Gizmodo’s reaction is the true meltdown; they simply can’t handle the idea of the media being exposed for their dishonesty.   

The most dishonest of people with the most nefarious of intentions often make accusations by disguising them as “questions”.  The front page headline for this very Economist interview was:  “Should You Be Afraid Of Elon Musk?”  

Musk has been directly and indirectly accused of promoting racism, fascism, sexism, and even genocide.  Through DOGE and the much needed shutdown of the corrupt USAID institution, he is now accused of “killing millions” by withholding humanitarian funding. 

Keep reading

Gestapo Tactics: German State Starts Banning AfD Candidates from Running for Office Because They Might Win

While the aging dictator of Nicaragua Daniel Ortega this week announced he was suspending elections indefinitely, Europe seems to be on a similar path – as Victor Orban’s Hungarian Fidesz Party was raided Wednesday and had their servers confiscated, and Romanian Presidential elections were anulled 2024. Now, Germany seems to have discovered a new strategy – as legacy parties are simply excluding candidates from the patriotic AfD party from elections.

Local elections are set to take place in the state of Lower Saxony, home of Volkswagen and surrounding the Free City of Hamburg, on Sept. 13, where the Alternative for Germany party is currently polling at about 20% behind Christian Democrats and Social Democrats at about 25% each. Nationally, the AfD is currently the strongest party in the polls at about 29%, and may even win a majority in the East German states of Saxony-Anhalt and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, which elect new state parliaments and state governments in September.

So the failing legacy parties are resorting to ever more repressive measures. Along with the ever-present threat of Antifa violence, debanking, and media slander, efforts have been underway to ban the largest opposition party outright. Since the German secret political police have not been able to prove the AfD is a danger to democracy in court, these efforts by the ruling Social Democrats seem doomed to fail.

Keep reading

Canadians contacted at home by gov officials over social media posts after hate speech law passes: JCCF

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms says it is receiving reports that some Canadians have been contacted at their homes by government officials over social media posts made months or even years earlier, following the passage of Canada’s new hate speech legislation.

The organization said the reports come after Parliament passed Bill C-9, the Combatting Hate Act, which expands Canada’s hate speech laws by creating new offences, increasing penalties, and removing certain legal safeguards that previously limited prosecutions for hate-related expression. The group said Canadians who are contacted by government officials over online posts should consider recording the interaction.

“If you believe your rights have been infringed or that you have been unfairly targeted, we encourage you to submit a case application through the Justice Centre’s online portal,” the organization said.

The Justice Centre provides legal representation to Canadians who believe their constitutional rights or freedoms have been violated by federal, provincial, or municipal governments or government entities, including universities, human rights commissions, professional associations, and public school boards. It said applications for legal assistance must be submitted online.

Canada would not be the first country to begin arrests for social media posts. The Times in the UK which used freedom of information requests to examine arrests in England and Wales under Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 and Section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988. The laws prohibit communications that are “grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character,” as well as messages that are “threatening, or knowingly false.”

According to The Times, there were 12,183 arrests in 2023 and 1,119 people were sentenced. The newspaper also reported that more than 65,000 arrests have been made since 2017.

Jake Hurfurt, head of research investigations at Big Brother Watch, told The Times the trend is “seriously concerning.” “Police look to be wasting countless hours on arresting people for posting things online that, while offensive, are not illegal. Heavy-handed use of vague communications offences is a threat to everyone’s freedom to express themselves online,” Hurfurt said.

Keep reading

Canadian court throws out Freedom Convoy leader’s partial acquittal

A Canadian appeals court overturned an earlier acquittal of intimidation against prominent Freedom Convoy protester and leader Pat King, saying that his earlier sentence was a “lenient penalty” and has thus ordered him to appear for new sentencing.

In a July 17 ruling, the Ontario Court of Appeal convicted King after prosecutors appealed one of his acquittals. They argued that King’s sentence given in early 2025 wasn’t severe enough.

As reported by LifeSiteNews, in February of 2025, King was handed a three-month conditional sentence for his role in the 2022 Freedom Convoy protest against COVID mandates of all forms. He was found guilty of a total of five offences in 2024, which included mischief, counselling mischief, as well as breaching a court order.

Ontario Superior Court Justice Charles Hackland had ruled that King must serve three additional months of house arrest and dedicate 100 hours to community service for his role in the Freedom Convoy. His original sentence would have been 12 months, but the court gave him credit for time served in jail before his trial.

King had used social media to organize protests of truckers in Ottawa in early 2022, in protest of former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s COVID dictates.

While he was acquitted of three intimidation charges, the government Crown lawyers appealed one of the acquittals, which found King innocent of intimidation after he had obstructed a highway. The appeals court agreed with the Crown’s ask.

“The freedom to protest does not include the right to engage in illegal conduct, and this protest evolved into what can fairly be described as an illegal occupation of a significant tract of downtown Ottawa,” wrote the three-judge panel.

“Put simply, criminal conduct is not less criminal because it occurs during a lawful protest.”

The appeals court added that his original 2024 sentence was a “lenient penalty” and a stronger penalty was needed to send a message.

In 2022, King was granted bail after spending five months in jail for his involvement with the protests. He had to pay a $25,000 fine and was banned from speaking to other Freedom Convoy members and was placed under curfew.

Keep reading