Stembridge News Digest

  • The next generation of Marxists is marching through the institutions Fri, 19 Apr 2024 11:00:00 +0000


    Zakiya Carr Johnson thinks America is a “failed historic model” — a society so awful, so laden with racism, misogyny, and patriarchy, that we can no longer try to tweak it or improve it. “Time has run out” on America, as she put it in a blog post she has since deleted.

    More and more, we hear similar troubling messages from Americans in everyday life. Just this month, a pro-Hamas demonstrator told a YouTuber that the protest he was leading was really about “getting rid of America, getting rid of the West.”

    Today, the revolutionary is no longer the worker but the member of racial and gender-marginalized groups.

    “Everyone here understands that at some level, we need to get rid of America. Completely,” he said, motioning toward the crowd of demonstrators. He was by no means the only pro-Hamas protestor to make this type of statement, but he got some attention because Elon Musk reposted the exchange on X (formerly Twitter), receiving over 40 million views.

    In the case of Carr Johnson, her views — that America is so suffused with racism, with misogyny, and with colonialism that “to make any change, we have to dismantle that traditional structure at every juncture” — should warrant the attention of all 330 million Americans.

    After all, Secretary of State Antony Blinken just this month appointed Carr Johnson as the State Department’s head of diversity, equity, and inclusion. From this position, she can influence the actions of all our diplomats, assistant secretaries, and undersecretaries. She can affect our foreign policy.

    Carr Johnson is the exemplar of a new political and cultural warrior that we call “NextGen Marxist.” Even though we had not heard her name before we wrote the book, she is the reason we both sat down to write “NextGen Marxism: What It Is and How to Combat It.”

    The idea that the country is systemically rotten (racist, patriarchal, heteronormative — fill in the blank) and that we live under an oppressive structure had been introduced into our universities since at least the 1980s. And in the wake of the 2020 Black Lives Matter and antifa riots, it has entered every nook and cranny of our lives. It has affected not only the upper reaches of the culture but of the Biden administration as well.

    The only solution, logic would dictate, is to jettison all the systems and structures. Improvement is obviously out of the question, and ferreting out individual racists and sexists when they violate civil rights law would not resolve the systemic problem.

    This is an important point. We both recognize — it would be crazy not to — that individual racists and misogynists do indeed exist. But the ideologues who have been proselytizing the word for decades — and to be precise, we mean promoters of critical race theory and all other types of critical theories — have drawn a very bright, bold line on their view that individual sinners do not matter, systems do.

    This is one of the characteristics that makes NextGen Marxists Marxist to the core. To Karl Marx, societal change had to be systemic, totalizing. His favorite line came from Goethe’s "Dr. Faust": “Everything that exists deserves to perish.”

    Another key element that NextGen Marxists share with their ideological master is the Manichean division of the world into an epic struggle between the oppressed and their oppressors (“Unterdrücker und Unterdrückte” as we read on the first page of the 1848 “Communist Manifesto”), from which the oppressed will emerge victorious once they realize they’re in chains.

    Some things have changed, and though to some orthodox Marxists, these changes are so fundamental as to render the present ideology no longer Marxist, to the two of us, these changes are more cosmetic.

    There is, for example, the evolution of Marx’s dictum that the changes in the material forces of production would dictate the pace of revolution. Cultural Marxists who came along in the 1920s, after revolutions failed in Western Europe, placed less emphasis on economics and more on culture. “Popular beliefs and ideas are themselves material forces,” quipped Italy’s Antonio Gramsci, the most famous of the cultural Marxist ideologues, in the 1920s.

    To this, American Marxists added race, sex, climate, and so on. “The racialization of all aspects of political life operates as a material force in itself,” Eric Mann, the former Marxist terrorist who recruited BLM architect Patrisse Cullors, wrote in 1996, neatly echoing his two predecessors’ themes from the 1840s and the 1920s.

    This baton-passing is what constitutes NextGen Marxism. Marxism evolved from the original economic themes of the “Manifesto” and “Capital,” to the cultural Marxism of Gramsci and others, to today’s race- and gender-obsessed variant of NextGen Marxists. Today, the revolutionary is no longer the worker, but the member of racial and gender-marginalized groups, or those who sign up to fight the revolution over climate, over Gaza, against colonialism, etc.

    So, we see climate activists blaming capitalism for “killing the planet” or the deputy prime minister of Canada saying that democracy may not be up the task of fighting climate change. Capitalism and democracy, you see, can now be fought under all these other ruses.

    But if, like us, you think that democracy and capitalism may not be perfect but are far superior to their alternatives, then we wrote a book for you. You’ll need it to make sense of the likes of Zakiya Carr Johnson.

    Mike Gonzalez is the Angeles T. Arredondo Senior Fellow on E Pluribus Unum at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C., and coauthor (with Katharine Gorka) of “NextGen Marxism” (Encounter Books). He spent close to 20 years as a journalist, 15 of them writing from Europe, Asia, and Latin America.

    Katharine Cornell Gorka is the coauthor (with Mike Gonzalez) of “NextGen Marxism” (Encounter Books).

  • Blaze News investigates: A child was removed by a red state following complaints over Christian views deemed sickening Fri, 19 Apr 2024 10:30:00 +0000


    Blue states abound with efforts to encroach on parental rights and to put distance between parents and children. It may, however, be a mistake to presume that residency in a red state with a Republican trifecta and a parental bill of rights in effect could offer any guarantee of relative protection.

    The Indiana Department of Child Services had a male minor suffering from both anorexia and gender dysphoria removed from the custody of his loving, traditional Catholic parents in 2021, even though Mary and Jeremy Cox were getting him help.

    The Coxes' refusal to compromise on their deeply held religious convictions and affirm the so-called transgender identity of their 16-year-old son appears to have been a driving factor behind both the DCS' initial investigation into the family and the state's subsequent efforts to keep the teen — referred to as A.C. in court documents — out of his familial home.

    The parents fought the state every step of the way but had no luck in the trial court or the appellate court.

    Seeking to help the Coxes find redress, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and attorney Joshua Hershberger of the Hershberger Law Office petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the parents' case last year, warning that similar cases were bound to recur "due to developing conflicts between parents and their children concerning gender identity."

    The high court ultimately declined to decide whether the Coxes, a software engineer and a clinical studies manager with a master of science degree in biochemistry and molecular biology, should have lost custody of their son.

    That declination could prove consequential, not just for other vulnerable children but for parental rights across the country.

    Fallout and revisionism

    Media reports following the high court's declination on March 18 frequently recirculated vulgar remarks attributed to the Coxes that were found to be unsubstantiated.

    Mainstream reports also parroted the narrative advanced by the state in its counter-brief and in the public statements attributed to Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita (R), which together went along the lines of: A.C. was sick and not receiving the care he needed while in the custody of his parents. Beneficent agents of the state saw it as their duty to intervene, not because of the parents' reality-affirming and tradition-informed beliefs but because A.C. would be better served outside of their home and sphere of influence.

    Even without mediation by the mainstream press, the state's position has resonated with some legal scholars.

    Following a quick read of the briefs filed with the Supreme Court, law professor Aviva Orenstein, the Karen Lake Buttrey and Donald W. Buttrey Chair at Indiana University Bloomington's Maurer School of Law, told Blaze News, "Religious beliefs can't be a protection for abusive behavior, and frankly, what the state alleged — which was not accepted by the other side, so you know, we have to dig deeper — it sounded pretty credible to me: that the parents were being abusive towards this child."

    Court documents and attorneys for the family have painted a different and altogether more convincing picture — one in which the Coxes' case was a significant battle lost in the ongoing war over parental rights.

    "In my view, the state has simply ignored the facts of the case," Hershberger told Blaze News. "The line has been, 'It's about the eating disorder, not about the transgender identity,' and yet the trial court barred [the parents] from speaking about the entire topic of gender identity. In fact, one of the key reasons in the motion asking for removal was that the parents had not accepted LGBTQ resources on parenting [transgender] children."

    Other parental rights advocates and religious groups are confident this custody battle was from the outset ideologically driven — not least because it's become increasingly clear in recent months that so-called "gender-affirming care" is largely based, at best, on pseudoscience — calling the whole ordeal a "moral and legal outrage."

    While so far unsuccessful, the Coxes' saga has also prompted legislative efforts to ensure that something comparable does not recur in the Hoosier State.

    Although the past is disputed and the future is uncertain, Mary and Jeremy Cox know now that they must "continue to advocate for state policies and laws that protect parental rights, the free exercise of religion, and free speech" so that "parents of faith can raise their children without fear of state officials knocking on their doors and taking their children."

    Raising the alarm

    Bishop Timothy Doherty, who oversees the Dioceses of Lafayette-in-Indiana, refrained from commenting on the case, except to note that he finds it "problematic that much of Catholic teaching is characterized as 'religious,' when so many directives are based on reason."

    Dr. Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, did not similarly hold back, telling Blaze News, "It is a fundamental principle in Western jurisprudence that children do not belong to the state — they belong to parents. This principle cannot be overridden save for the most egregious of instances."

    "What happened to Mary and Jeremy Cox is a moral and legal outrage," stressed Donohue.

    Donohue suggested that if "Indiana can, in effect, legally kidnap kids," the outlook appears to be especially bleak in liberal states such as New York and California.

    "Not only is this an ominous sign for Catholics, it is a bad omen for people of all faiths," continued Donohue.

    Alvin Lui, the president of the parental rights advocacy group Courage Is a Habit, underscored that the risk is shared by all parents out of step with the ideological fads of the day.

    "The religious families are the first to be targeted, especially Christian and Catholic families, but this is being extended to any families who do not follow whatever the current Marxist or woke agenda is," Lui told Blaze News. "Parents must come to the sobering fact that we can no longer depend on anyone else to protect our kids. We have to take a strong stand BEFORE tragedy arrives at our doorstep."

    Lui has campaigned in recent months against proposed legislation in Maine and other states that would serve to separate children from parents if those kids are said to be seeking "gender-affirming care." He has elsewhere shared parental strategies for protecting kids.

    The parental rights advocate added, "The transgender cult and the people funding them do not care about the Constitution. They want it completely abolished because they're a big part of the cultural revolution to dismantle America."

    Losing a child

    A.C. notified his parents in December 2019 that he identified as a girl. He requested to be referred to both by a new name and by pronouns corresponding to his new feminine persona.

    Besides an apparent case of gender dysphoria, A.C. also suffered from anorexia — a condition that worsened while he was away at an ostensibly woke residential high school, the Indiana Academy of Science, Mathematics, and Humanities on the Ball State University campus.

    As indicated in their September 2023 petition for writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court, Mary and Jeremy Cox pursued therapeutic help for their son by February 2020. After ten months of therapeutic care, the parents apparently sought out a new therapist for "substantial assistance with the identity issue or with family dynamics."

    Having monitored A.C.'s weight while he was away at school and observed a worsening trend, the Coxes decided to un-enroll him after the 2020-2021 school year and sign him up for a different school.

    After a wellness check with his primary care physician in April 2021, A.C. was apparently referred to a specialist on eating disorders, then underwent a psycho-social assessment. Mary Cox subsequently scheduled a full mental health evaluation for her son on June 3, 2021.

    Becket and Hershberger noted in the petition that "in seeking treatment for concerns about A.C.'s weight loss and eating habits, the Parents followed the recommendations of A.C.'s primary care physician. Throughout this period, the Parents engaged in conversations with A.C. concerning their religious beliefs and gender identity and attempted to find middle ground by using the nickname 'A.'"

    Hershberger told Blaze News, "They did everything to try to meet [A.C.] in the middle, trying to understand how to even use the term 'they.' They're also meeting all of his medical, educational and mental health needs. They recognize the problem is his eating habit. They were following their doctor's recommendation and they had in fact scheduled an appointment with a specialist prior to the state intervening in their home."

    Evidently, someone outside the home figured A.C.'s parents for villains who, despite proactively taking these steps, still refused to affirm the boy's so-called gender identity.

    According to the state's counter-brief, the DCS started its case against the Coxes in May 2021 after receiving two reports that the parents "were suspected of abusing or neglecting their child, A.C. One report alleged that Mother was using 'rude and demeaning language' toward A.C. 'regarding Child’s transgender identity.'"

    "The second report, just ten days later, alleged that parents were 'verbally and emotionally abusing Child because they do not accept Child's transgender identity,' and that 'the abuse was getting worse,'" claimed the counter-brief.

    These allegations — suggestive of a conflation of the parents' views on gender ideology with abuse from the start — were later dropped, but not until months after they served the purpose of excusing interference on the part of the state.

    A DCS family case manager investigated the misleading reports, met with the Coxes, and spoke with an employee at the boy's school. The department then initiated a proceeding on the basis of the neglect and abuse allegations.

    The trial court heard that the boy's parents were allegedly not getting him treatment and that he had thoughts of self-harm because his "gender identity was 'not being accepted'" and he had been removed from school, said the counter-brief.

    Jeremy Cox told the court in turn that he and his wife had deeply held religious beliefs on gender and had previously sought therapeutic treatment for their son. The parents further noted that their son had other medical problems, largely tying back to his anorexia.

    The DCS underscored at the initial detention hearing, "We just feel that at this point in time this child needs to be in a home that's not going to teach her that trans, like everything about transgender … tell her how she should think and how she should feel. However, she should be in a home where she is excepted [sic] for who she is."

    Hershberger told Blaze News that the DCS "specifically argued that the child should be in a home … that would verbally affirm the child's transgender identity in contrast to the parents' religious beliefs."

    The trial court issued an initial order in which it preliminarily concluded there was probable cause to believe that A.C. was a Child In Need of Service and ordered the teen removed from the Coxes' custody in June 2021. The court allowed the parents to visit their child for a few hours unsupervised once a week "so long as certain topics are not addressed," namely their views on gender ideology.

    Hershberger and Becket summarized the result thusly: "The trial court removed A.C. from fit parents, held that their beliefs and best judgment equaled neglect, shut down meaningful conversation about their core disagreement even in therapy (until the Parents requested clarification), and limited visitation to a few hours one day a week."

    In the months that followed, A.C.’s condition worsened significantly whilst in state custody, such that he reached a weight of just 100 pounds and was allegedly at risk of brain and bone injury. Despite his illness, A.C. did not believe that he needed any treatment.

    At a later trial court hearing, all parties agreed to drop the "unsubstantiated" allegations of neglect and abuse against the parents. The court accepted the dismissal in November 2021 as well as the understanding that A.C. posed a danger to himself. The recognition that the Coxes were, after all, fit parents did not, however, reunify their family and enable them to resume caring for their son.

    At a Dec. 8, 2021, dispositional hearing, the DCS allegedly testified that the disagreement between the Coxes and A.C. over transgenderism remained a barrier to his return home.

    The parents appealed the case to the Indiana Court of Appeals, taking issue also with the trial court's prohibition on their ability to speak forthrightly with their son.

    In October 2022, the appellate court ruled that the trial court's decisions were not in violation of the state and federal constitutions.

    "The Parents have the right to exercise their religious beliefs," said the appellate court, "but they do not have the right to exercise them in a manner that causes physical or emotional harm to the child."

    The Indiana Court of Appeals concluded that while the Coxes were fit parents, the familial disagreement over the boy's gender identity was exacerbating his eating disorder.

    The Indiana Supreme Court declined to hear the case.

    Pinning high hopes on the high court

    Running short on options, the Coxes fought to put their case before the U.S. Supreme Court, presenting the following questions:

    • Whether a prior restraint barring a religious parent's speech about the topic of sex and gender with their child while allowing and even requiring speech on the same topic from a different viewpoint violates the Free Speech or Free Exercise clause of the First Amendment; and
    • Whether a trial court's order removing a child from fit parents without a particularized finding of neglect or abuse violates their right to the care, custody, and control of their child under the Fourteenth Amendment.

    The petition for a writ of certiorari filed on behalf of the Coxes emphasized that their faith "does not prevent them from using nicknames or attempting to work and live with others that hold different beliefs; however, their faith requires them to refrain from speaking in a manner that their faith instructs is immoral, dishonest, or harmful."

    Moreover, the petition indicated that "in addition to the Parents' religious views, based on scientific evidence and their own experience as parents, M.C. and J.C. believe that using crossgender pronouns or names inconsistent with a child's biological sex is not in a child’s best interest."

    Becket and Hershberger stressed in the petition that, "Given the facts of this case and the arbitrary and almost absolute power it grants to juvenile courts over custody and parental speech, no parent in Indiana — and especially no parent with a child that struggles with mental health issues — should sleep easy tonight."

    The Heritage Defense Foundation, a Christian advocacy group, evidently agreed, noting in its amicus brief in support of the Coxes that "left unaddressed, the violation at issue will destabilize the bedrock of society and foster anxiety among parents across the country regarding the security of their parental rights."

    "Where the parents have not been determined to be or to have been abusive or neglectful, the state has no jurisdiction to override the decision-making of the parents regarding what is in the best interests of their child. 'The child is not the mere creature of the State,'" continued the HDF.

    "If custody by parents is always subject to the will of the state, even when the parents have committed no wrong, parents become mere servants of the state," added the HDF. "The state and its bureaucrats become the arbitrary micro-managers of every family, controlling them with the implied threat: 'Do what the current political administration says or lose your children.'"

    Concerning the parents' last-ditch legal effort, Lori Windham, vice president and senior counsel at Becket, and Hershberger said in a joint statement, "We are confident that the Supreme Court will ultimately protect this basic right and ensure that parents can raise their children consistent with their religious beliefs."

    The Coxes stated, "We love our son and wanted to care for him, but the state of Indiana robbed us of that opportunity by taking him from our home and banning us from speaking to him about gender."

    "We are hopeful that the justices will take our case and protect other parents from having to endure the nightmare we did," they added.

    The state alternatively argued that the case, which involved no damages claim, was moot now that A.C. had aged out of foster care and no relief could be given; that the temporary speech restriction was lawful; that the appellate court's holdings did not conflict with the decisions of any other court; and that there was "no prospect that the narrow factual issues here will reoccur."

    Another setback

    The Supreme Court ultimately declined to take up the case last month.

    The Coxes said in response, "No other loving parents should have to endure what we did. The pain of having our son taken from our home and kept from our care because of our beliefs will stay with us forever."

    The bereaved couple added, "We can't change the past, but we will continue to fight for a future where parents of faith can raise their children without fear of state officials knocking on their doors and taking their children."

    Hershberger said in a statement to Blaze News that while "SCOTUS denied the Petition of Mary and Jeremy Cox, we did accomplish the goal of placing this fact pattern in front of SCOTUS as a real and growing threat to parental rights, freedom of religion, and free speech."

    "These constitutional principles represent a cause — not just a case — and we will continue to advocate for that cause in law and culture,” added the attorney, who is also a teaching pastor in southeast Indiana.

    Joe Davis, a former litigator at Jones Walker LLP who now serves as legal counsel at Becket, emphasized to Blaze News that the case amounted to "every parent's worst nightmare" and a "shocking and chilling attack on parental rights." He indicated that absent a ruling from the Supreme Court, those keen to break up families will be furthered emboldened.

    Mary Cox confirmed to Blaze News that she and Jeremy Cox have separately sued the DCS and the case workers for "making false statements about family in their initial report and court documents."

    State sympathies

    Following the exhaustion of the Coxes' legal options, the Indiana Attorney General's Office directed Blaze News to Rokita's February statement to mainstream publications, where he said, "We always protect parental rights and religious liberty."

    "Neither we nor the Indiana courts believe that the State can remove a child because of a parent's religious beliefs, views about gender identity, or anything of the sort. Our office is fulfilling our statutory duty to defend this state agency and to keep an oath I swore when I took office," said Rokita, a Catholic Republican whose office underscored he has made a habit of fighting "transanity."

    "As the record shows, this state agency acted not on the use of pronouns but because of the child's extreme eating disorder," said Rokita, who is legally obligated to defend state agencies in court.

    While Rokita retroactively disentangled the two concerns, the Department of Child Services clearly acted early on because of pronoun use and the corresponding gender affirmations. The state even noted in its counter-brief that the family case manager had expressed concern to the trial court that A.C. had "thoughts of self-harm because the child's gender identity was 'not being accepted.'" Removal was clearly perceived as a way of landing A.C. in an environment where his gender dysphoria would be ideologically buttressed.

    "The Indiana governor sets DCS policy and hires those employees," continued Rokita. "I am very sympathetic to the parents, and everyone who follows my work as attorney general knows that I am the biggest defender and proponent of parental rights."

    Mary Cox told Blaze News that "the state ignored the clear and undisputed facts of the case and decided to defend a government agency that forced its ideology on parents rather than defend parental rights."

    Blaze News reached out to the DCS for comment but did receive a response by deadline.

    The DCS has, however, previously stated that when evaluating a child's best interest, it endeavors to make a "holistic evaluation of the child's physical and mental health and environment."

    "DCS does not — and will not — pursue a case solely on a parent's choice not to affirm their child's gender identity," added the department.

    Removal-affirming care

    Professor Orenstein of the Maurer School of Law suggested that the state's case was well argued and dismissed religious conservatives' alternative framing.

    "We're getting to the point where if you wave the flag of religion, you can do what you want," said Orenstein, who has served as a court-appointed special advocate for abused and neglected children. "At some point, this cannot be the trump card to everything — that 'these are my religious beliefs.'"

    When asked whether a refusal to affirm a child's so-called gender identity would qualify under state law as neglect, Orenstein responded, "I don't think per se."

    "It's okay for parents not to jump immediately on board," continued the professor. However, if a child is in danger, and it is "very clear the kid's behavior is connected to what the parents are doing," the professor suggested the state has an obligation to intervene.

    In the case of such an ideological disagreement with a teenager — particularly a disagreement that has obvious health consequences — Orenstein suggested "you should let the person decide." Failing to defer to a child on such matters might otherwise register as "an elemental lack of respect for the child's personhood, but that goes along with conservative religious values in a very patriarchal system. You know, that is, 'I am the parent and I am in charge.'"

    In conversation with Orenstein, Blaze News raised the matter of California Gov. Gavin Newsom's September refusal to ratify Assembly Bill 957, a bill that would have had courts factor in a parent's affirmation of the child's gender identity when determining the best interests of a child in a child custody or visitation proceeding. At the time, Newsom expressed concern that such a law could set a precedent that might be weaponized, in turn, against minorities by "other-minded officials."

    When asked whether the Coxes' case might be used as a template by bad actors or "other-minded officials" against other parents with deeply held convictions, including progressive parents, Orenstein suggested that when it comes to political conservatives, "there's no low too low. Would this be a talking point? Perhaps. Would it be a good argument? No."

    G. David Caudill, founder and executive director of the LGBT activist organization Equality Indiana, suggested that critics' concerns about the results of the matter "are exaggerated."

    Having been asked to comment about concerns that child services might be weaponized against families with viewpoints regarded as undesirable to the state, Caudill said, "The use of the word 'weaponized' in regards to governmental actions is used by extremists when they dislike the results of that governmental action. The word 'weaponized' is a buzzword used to rile up and rally their activist base and voters."

    The final word

    Mary Cox torpedoed the insinuation that concerns about the DCS' weaponization amount to empty rhetoric. She said in a written reply to Blaze News, "DCS testified at the initial hearing: 'We just feel that at this point in time this child needs to be in a home that's not going to teach her that trans, like everything about transgender — tell her how she should think and how she should feel.'"

    "This is not just a risk. This is a reality," said Mrs. Cox.

    "We are gravely concerned that our case will be used against other Indiana parents," continued the Christian mother. "Further, as we explained in our petition to SCOTUS, several states have passed laws allowing state agencies to remove or hide children from their parents if the parents do not agree to 'gender-affirming care.' And Abigail Martinez, a mother from California that endured a similar case, filed an amicus brief with SCOTUS on our behalf."

    Blaze News previously detailed Martinez's claims that the government of Los Angels County encouraged her daughter to identify as male, to sign up for sex-change treatments, and to be placed in foster care. The young girl, who was battling depression, ultimately committed suicide.

    Mrs. Cox stressed that this is not a problem that only traditional Christians should worry about.

    Like Lui and Donohue, she noted that "teachings around family life and human sexuality lie at the heart of most religions. For this reason, parents of any religion or no religion at all that hold to a traditional view of gender should be concerned."

    "No other loving parents should have to endure what we did," said Mrs. Cox.

    Mrs. Cox indicated that readers ought to know that "if this can happen in Indiana, it can happen anywhere. We lost custody of our child because we disagreed with the state about gender, and it could happen to your family as well. We need to work together to ensure that parental rights are protected in law and culture."

    Cox Family Testimonial Video youtu.be

    Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

  • Video shows thug knocking down California woman from behind to steal her purse in broad daylight Fri, 19 Apr 2024 02:18:42 +0000


    A brazen attack on a woman who was visiting her mother in Los Angeles is angering many after it was captured on security video.

    Juliana Murillo told KTLA-TV that she was speaking out in hopes of helping police find the culprit who attacked her in her hometown of San Fernando.

    “I was born and raised in San Fernando,” she said. “I’m a daughter, sister, I’m a friend, a loved one and no loved one should go through this. It was unexpected. It was just traumatic.”

    Murillo said she was delivering a bouquet of roses to her mother for her birthday on Monday just before 3 p.m. when the attacker snuck up behind her and then shoved her violently to the ground. She said she slammed her face into her mother's metal outer door as she fell.

    “He pushed me really hard and I hit my head on the door,” she said. “My body just went into shock. I couldn’t process what was going on. I kept saying, ‘What are you doing, what are you doing?’ He used force to turn me over and he pulled out my purse and took off.”

    Murillo was able to resist the man for a few moments before he ripped her purse away and fled in a dark-colored BMW car. A neighborhood resident saw him drive away but said he was unable to read the license plate.

    Murillo said that the man was able to steal her car keys, credit cards and her identification. He also tried to use her credit card soon afterward and was able to get into her PayPal account, according to the victim. She also ended up with a large bruise on her knee.

    SFPD Lt. Walter Dominguez described the suspect as a light-skinned Hispanic in his 30s with a dark mustache. He told the San Fernando Sun that there isn't an increase in these kinds of "strong-arm robberies" in the area.

    Murillo offered advice to others who might be targeted in these attacks.

    “Always be vigilant,” Murillo said. “I speak for many women who have been attacked that feel scared. Don’t be scared. We’re a community can uplift each other and take care of one another.”

    Here's the video of the attack:

    Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

  • Pelosi's 'The Art of Power,' slated to come out later this year Fri, 19 Apr 2024 01:30:00 +0000


    Democratic Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, who has previously served as House speaker and was the first and only woman ever to do so, has a book coming out later this year titled "The Art of Power."

    The long-serving lawmaker who has been in office since 1987, spent two decades serving as either House speaker or House minority leader.

    Pelosi, 84, is seeking re-election this year.

    "Pelosi took positions that established her as a prophetic voice on the major moral issues of the day, warning early about the dangers of the Iraq War and of the Chinese government’s long record of misbehavior. This moral courage prepared her for the arrival of Trump, with whom she famously tangled, becoming a red-coated symbol of resistance to his destructive presidency. Here, she reveals how she went toe-to-toe with Trump, leading up to January 6, 2021, when he unleashed his post-election fury on the Congress. Pelosi gives us her personal account of that day," a book description on the Simon & Schuster website states.

    "Nearly two years later, violence and fury would erupt inside Pelosi’s own home when an intruder, demanding to see the Speaker, viciously attacked her beloved husband, Paul. Here, Pelosi shares that horrifying day and the traumatic aftermath for her and her family," the description notes.

    Simon & Schuster's site also indicates that Pelosi and her husband "live in San Francisco, which they consider heaven on earth."

    Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

  • WATCH: RFK Jr. says liberals support censorship and are 'pro-war,' calling it 'astonishing' Fri, 19 Apr 2024 01:00:00 +0000


    Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who launched a White House bid as a Democrat last year before later switching to an independent run, has said that liberals support censorship and are "pro-war," which he finds "astonishing."

    Kennedy, who recently spoke to BlazeTV host Glenn Beck for more than an hour, suggested that there has been a shift from liberal parties being "skeptical of corporate control of our government" to where "pharmaceutical companies are like ... the angels of heaven for them."

    President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump, the presumptive nominees of their respective political parties, are widely regarded as candidates most likely to win the 2024 contest. But Kennedy, who announced Nicole Shanahan as his running mate last month, thinks that he can win.

    While speaking to Beck, Kennedy spoke of America's massive national debt, which currently stands at more than $34 trillion, warning that it will "destroy our country." He advocated slashing the defense budget, calling for "huge cuts." He also said health costs must be decreased by bringing an end to the "chronic disease epidemic."

    The presidential candidate noted that "you can't eliminate racism by telling people, 'Don't be racist,'" but he suggested that children can be instilled with resilience that enables them to stand up confidently for themselves if they face racism.

    He also noted during the interview that he supports school choice and free markets.

    Kennedy's uncle, President John F. Kennedy, and father, U.S. Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, were both assassinated in the 1960s.

    Asked about his stance on the Second Amendment, the independent candidate indicated that he does not seek to confiscate people's firearms. While he noted that his father and uncle were both fatally shot, he said there is a "gun culture" in the U.S. of people who view the issue as an "existential right." He said that he believes in the Constitution.

    Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

  • Burger King workers rescue abused children from homeless mother and drooling, meth-addict, illegal alien boyfriend, police say Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:30:00 +0000


    Utah police praised workers at a Burger King fast food restaurant for rescuing children from neglect and abuse from their mother and her illegal alien boyfriend, who are homeless.

    The employees at the burger shop in Taylorsville called police on Tuesday to report that a family “appeared to be homeless and in need of assistance," according to an arrest affidavit.

    They told police that they would sometimes give the family food for free, but this time their 4-year-old child appeared malnourished and asked for help.

    Police said when they arrived, they found 36-year-old Rodolfo Martinez-Avila “sitting at the table, face down, with drool running out of his mouth."

    Martinez-Avila is the boyfriend of 23-year-old Azucena Rodriguez, the mother of the two children aged 4 and approximately 6 months old.

    The affidavit said the man "seemed confused by simple commands and statements, made continuous rapid movements and fidgets, and generally seemed unable to clearly articulate himself."

    Police said the boy had dried blood in his nostrils and when he was asked by paramedics if he had any injuries, he showed them bruises on his chest. When he was asked who had caused his injuries, the boy blamed Martinez-Avila.

    "The 4-year-old and 6-month-old were taken into the back of an ambulance," police said. "Officers documented numerous injuries on the 4-year-old, including bruising on both arms, his torso, and his back, a scratch on his stomach, and the aforementioned bloody nose. The 6-month-old appeared to be malnourished and had possible injuries."

    More extensive injuries were documented after the children were treated at a Primary Children's Hospital, according to the affidavit.

    The mother allegedly told police that she had witnessed Martinez-Avila abusing her children, but she did not try to stop him because he would threaten her. She also told police she was homeless, though they noted that she "has other locations to live and stay but she declines to go there."

    Police said Martinez-Avila admitted to grabbing the boy by the arms that day and also said he had taken methamphetamine the day before.

    The mother allegedly admitted to taking meth "regularly," according to an affidavit. Police also said that Martinez-Avila had been deported from the U.S. years ago and returned illegally.

    The mother was arrested on suspicion of child abuse, and her boyfriend was arrested for investigation of aggravated child abuse, intoxication, and possession of drug paraphernalia.

    The children were taken into custody by Child Protective Services.

    Taylorsville is a suburb of St. Lake City with about 60,000 residents.

    Here's a news report about the incident:

    Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

  • Republican Rep. Jake LaTurner announces he won't run for re-election Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:04:55 +0000


    Republican Rep. Jake LaTurner of Kansas, who has been serving as a House lawmaker since early 2021, has announced that he will not seek re-election this year.

    "I will proudly serve the remainder of the 118th Congress, but after much prayer and consideration, I will not seek reelection this Fall. The people of Kansas who elected me to serve in the United States House of Representatives have given me the professional honor of my life, but it is time to pursue other opportunities and have the benefit of spending more time with my family," the congressman said in a statement.

    "Suzanne and I are the proud parents of four young children, and for us the busy schedule of serving in and running for Congress has taken a toll. The unrepeatable season of life we are in, where our kids are still young and at home, is something I want to be more present for," he explained.

    GOP Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida suggested that the Congress should become more "family friendly," tweeting, "@RepLaTurner sits on committee with me. We will be losing a good member of House Oversight. I think this also speaks to the nature of Congress... it's not exactly family friendly. That should change."

    While some House Republicans, including Luna, voted against passage of two government appropriations packages last month, LaTurner was one of the GOP lawmakers who voted in favor of passing both packages.

    "While I will not be a candidate in 2024 or the state elections in 2026, I am hopeful that in another season of life, with new experiences and perspectives, I can contribute in some small way and advocate for the issues I care most about," LaTurner said in his statement.

    Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

  • 12-year-old boy missing for nearly 4 years found dead in attic of New York home where sex offender reportedly lived Thu, 18 Apr 2024 23:13:16 +0000


    The remains of a 12-year-old boy who had been missing for years were found in the attic of a residence in New York where a sex offender reportedly lived at a sober living group.

    Jaylen Griffin left his home on August 4, 2020, to go to the grocery store and was never seen alive again.

    On Sunday, three and a half years later, his grandmother heard the news she had been praying against for years.

    “I ask the Lord to give me strength. That’s how I process it,” Shirley Banks said to WGRZ-TV. “I held that up until yesterday when they told me they had found him and he was deceased.”

    The boy's remains were found on Friday at a home on Sheffield Avenue in South Buffalo, and police have designated his death as a homicide.

    "The body that was located in the house had been there for a significant amount of time," Commissioner Joseph Gramaglia told reporters in a media briefing Monday.

    The remains were found by a maintenance worker who was working on the home, which was located about five miles from where Griffin disappeared. The worker had been called to investigate an odor coming from the attic.

    Gramaglia said that the Erie County Medical Examiner confirmed the identity of the victim through the use of dental records.

    "I do want to extend my sincerest sympathies to the family of Jaylen," he added. "This department has conducted extensive searches and I want Jaylen's family to know that we are working diligently to bring the next closure for the family."

    Acting Erie County District Attorney Michael Keane said an autopsy report could take months to complete.

    "That's going to hopefully reveal to us some forensic evidence that is going to be significant in the investigation," Keane said.

    The family of the victim has had to deal with a lot of violence and loss. His mother, Joanna Ponzo, died in September, and his brother, Jawaan, was shot and killed in November 2020 just months after the boy's disappearance.

    Neighbors living near the home told WGRZ that the home had been damaged by a fire eight years ago and since had been rented out to recent parolees, sex offenders, and people with mental illness.

    A report from WKBW-TV found that the house was owned by a company that runs adult support homes. They also confirmed that just a month before the remains were found, a sexual offender registered to live at the home was booked on a new sex charge.

    Police have not yet identified any suspect in the homicide investigation.

    “This is nothing short of a tragedy for a 12-year-old boy to go missing and for it to end this way," said Gramaglia. "This is an absolute tragedy and it’s very sad.”

    The boy would have turned 16 years old the week after his body was found, he added.

    Here's a report about the incident:

    Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

  • Is ANOTHER Glenn Beck prediction about to come true? Thu, 18 Apr 2024 23:08:10 +0000


    Nearly two years ago, Glenn Beck issued a warning to his audience: “The federal government [will] use climate change as the national emergency,” which will “give the president the kinds of powers that a president only gets when we are attacked on the homeland and are at war.”

    Today, Glenn’s prescience was confirmed.

    According to a Daily Caller article published Thursday, “White House officials are weighing whether to declare a national climate emergency several months out from the 2024 election.”

    However, this isn’t the first time the Biden administration has threatened to flex its climate change muscles.

    “The president’s administration previously considered a similar measure back in 2022 once negotiations over clean energy failed ... Biden also said that he declared a climate emergency in 2023 when he implemented ‘conservative policies,”’ the article reported.

    So, when Glenn said that “all of the agencies that are supposed to protect and defend the Constitution” would be “used to protect and defend the agenda against climate change,” it looks like he may be about to be proved right.

    While the decision to officially declare a national climate emergency has not yet been made, the pressure to make such a drastic move is higher than ever considering the upcoming election.

    The article noted that “such a move could help Biden win over some of the youth vote,” which he desperately needs to beat Trump, whom he’s been trailing in the polls.

    According to Aru Shiney-Ajay, the executive director for the Sunshine Movement — an organization that advocates for political action in matters related to climate change — “If Biden wants to win the youth vote, he needs to take forceful action on climate change.”

    Only time will tell if Biden decides to finally pull the trigger and declare a national climate emergency. However, considering Glenn tends to be quite clairvoyant on these matters, we won’t be shocked if the official announcement comes.

    To hear Glenn’s warning from June of 2022, watch the clip below.


    Want more from Glenn Beck?

    To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

  • Who’s really at war with Ukraine? Apparently 'it’s not Russia' Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:20:42 +0000


    Even though Russia invaded Ukraine over two years ago, the ongoing war between the two countries still has many people confused. Who’s the good guy in this situation? Surely, it’s not Putin. But Zelenskyy? What about the U.S. and the other countries offering aid to Ukraine?

    According to founder and CEO of “Truth in Media” Ben Swann, "none of the above" is the answer. Despite the various narratives surrounding the war, Swann claims that Ukraine is actually a pawn in a much bigger game.

    Swann recently joined Auron MacIntyre to explain how Ukraine became a “corrupt slush fund for the global managerial elite.”

    “Is there something particular about the culture or the way that Ukraine is structured or the corruption there that allows United States companies or officials to profit uniquely from Ukraine?” MacIntyre asked.

    “There’s a couple of things, actually,” Swann said. “Ukraine itself was historically, in the last 40 years, infamously ... one of the most corrupt countries on the planet. ... It’s run by oligarchs; it was handed over and basically auctioned off to the highest bidder; it is essentially run by gangsters.”

    Further, “we have within the United States a whole lot of political players who have managed to get themselves involved in Ukraine,” including the Biden family, which we know “has business interests” in the country, Swann explained.

    “Ukraine is being handed over. It’s not just about the war but the rebuilding effort afterwards; it’s the massive global funds that are being set up to administer hundreds of billions of dollars going back into Ukraine and the control of that.”

    Swann went on to explain that Argentina has had the highest International Monetary Fund debt of any country, which is why Javier Milei was elected — to hopefully recover their “famously destroyed economy.” However, once the warring between Russia and Ukraine comes to an end, “by a long margin ... it will be Ukraine.”

    A lot of the global money being funneled into Ukraine — money we’ve been told is a generous gift to aid their war against Russia — “is no longer a gift” and “no longer aid.”

    “It’s a loan,” Swann said. “[The money] is all being restructured into loans that now the nation of Ukraine and the people of Ukraine will owe for generations” — billions, if not trillions of dollars that will take “lifetimes” to pay off.

    “If you really want to look at who’s at war with Ukraine and who just conquered Ukraine, it’s multinational corporations; it’s not Russia. The real winner — the real entity that has won a war without firing a bullet at the people of Ukraine — is multinational corporations that now own that country and will own it into the foreseeable future,” Swann concluded.

    To hear MacIntyre’s response, watch the video below.


    Want more from Auron MacIntyre?

    To enjoy more of this YouTuber and recovering journalist's commentary on culture and politics, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

  • High school student utters the phrase 'illegal alien.' Hours later, assistant principal suspends him: 'Racially insensitive' Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:25:00 +0000


    A North Carolina high school student was suspended last week because he dared utter the phrase "illegal alien" in class.

    Last week, Central Davidson High School student Christian McGhee asked his English teacher an otherwise innocuous question about a vocabulary assignment that included the word "alien."

    "Like space aliens or illegal aliens without green cards?" McGhee asked.

    The question allegedly prompted a fellow classmate to threaten McGhee because he felt offended by the question, according to the Carolina Journal, which caused the teacher to phone the assistant principal. School administration then decided to suspend McGhee for three days.

    The violation? McGhee made a "racially insensitive comment" that allegedly violated school policies, according to a school document.

    However, McGhee told the Carolina Journal that he was not directing his comment toward anyone in particular.

    "I didn't make a statement directed towards anyone; I asked a question," the student said. "I wasn't speaking of Hispanics because everyone from other countries needs green cards, and the term 'illegal alien' is an actual term that I hear on the news and can find in the dictionary."

    McGhee's mother, Leah, told "The Pete Kaliner Show" the matter was initially resolved when the assistant principal pulled Christian and his classmate into the hallway. The classmate told the administrator he was "just joking" about fighting Christian, according to Leah, and the students were dismissed. But after lunch, the assistant principal allegedly approached the student who threatened Christian to ask him if he truly believed the question wasn't a racial remark.

    After that rendezvous, Christian was called to the office and suspended.

    Christian's parents later met with the assistant principal to appeal the suspension. They explained the phrase "illegal alien" appears in the dictionary, federal code, and numerous media outlets. But their efforts were unsuccessful.

    "If this was handled properly in the classroom, it could have easily been used as a teachable moment for everyone," Leah McGhee said.

    The family has since retained a lawyer to help them tackle what they believe is an excessive reaction to something miniscule.

    "The label of racism in today's world is so strong that I feel like we do not need to tackle this giant on our own," the mother explained.

    Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

  • Biden apparently has a new favorite alternate history: His uncle was devoured by cannibals Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:10:00 +0000


    President Joe Biden has long had an issue disentangling fact from fiction — and when dealing with facts, the 81-year-old Democrat often gets them wrong.

    This week, Biden claimed that his uncle, 2nd Lt. Ambrose J. Finnegan Jr., was eaten by cannibals. It is unclear whose story the geriatric president has appropriated on his uncle's behalf, but the U.S. government's official record does not support the story Biden has now elected to tell on at least two occasions.

    Speaking to reporters a Wilkes-Barre Scranton International Airport in Avoca, Pennsylvania, on Tuesday, Biden said: "Ambrose Finnegan — we called him 'Uncle Bosie' — he — he was shot down. He was Army Air Corps before there was an Air Force. He flew single-engine planes, reconnaissance flights over New Guinea. He had volunteered because someone couldn't make it. He got shot down in an area where there were a lot of cannibals in New Guinea at the time."

    "They never recovered his body," added Biden. "But the government went back, when I went down there, and they checked and found some parts of the plane and the like."

    According to the Department of Defense's Prisoner of War/Missing In Action Accounting Agency, Biden's uncle was flying a two-engine Douglas A-20 Havoc medium bomber on May 14, 1944. Whereas the president suggested it had been shot down, the government record indicates the plane "was forced to ditch in the ocean off the north coast" for "unknown reasons."

    "Three men failed to emerge from the sinking wreck and were lost in the crash," said the official record. "One crew member survived and was rescued by a passing barge. An aerial search the next day found no trace of the missing aircraft or the lost crew members."

    The Associated Press reported that the U.S. government's record of missing service members "does not attribute Finnegan's death to hostile action or indicate cannibals were any factor."

    At a campaign event earlier in the day, Biden addressed workers at the United Steelworkers headquarters in Scranton, Pennsylvania. During the largely mumbled speech, Biden said his uncle "got shot down in New Guinea, and they never found the body because there used to be — there are a lot of cannibals, for real, in that part of New Guinea."

    In both instances, the apparent purpose of the anecdote was to segue into a slight at former President Donald Trump.

    When speaking about his uncle at the airport, Biden said, "And what I was thinking about when I was standing [where Finnegan was memorialized] was when Trump refused to go up to the memorial for veterans in Paris, and he said they were a bunch of 'suckers' and 'losers.'"

    This claim, too, is unsubstantiated.

    Snopes indicated that there is no audio or video evidence that Trump ever said fallen soldiers were "suckers" and "losers." There is also no "documentation, such as transcripts or presidential notes" to support the allegations that Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic advanced in a September 2020 article.

    In his ostensibly baseless article, Goldberg — the Democratic booster whom the New York Times indicated in 2016 had "shaped The Atlantic's recent editorial endorsing Hillary Clinton for President" —cited "people with firsthand knowledge of the discussion that day."

    Trump said of the allegations, "I would be willing to swear on anything that I never said that about our fallen heroes. There is nobody that respects them more. No animal — nobody — what animal would say such a thing?"

    John Bolton, Trump's former national security adviser, and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, both with Trump at the time, indicated the claims were false.

    In effect, in crossing two yarns Tuesday in hopes of hurting his political rival, Biden demonstrated only his loose grasp on the truth, which appears to have slackened greatly in recent years.

    In February, Biden discussed a recent chat he had with François Mitterrand. The trouble was not so much Biden's suggestion that Mitterrand was a German, but that the former French president has been dead since 1996.

    The apparent ghost whisperer has also regaled supporters on multiple occasions with the tale of his impossible conversation with an Amtrak conductor named Angelo Negri, which apparently took place 20 years after the man's retirement and a year after his death.

    After eulogizing Indiana Rep. Jackie Walorski, who died in 2022, Biden called out to her during a speech in Washington, saying, "Representative Jackie — are you here? Where's Jackie? — I think she was going to be here."

    Last year, Biden confused Ukraine and Iraq twice in 24 hours. Neither nation likely took it to heart, granted the apparent leader of the free world has also confused his own sister with his wife.

    Although it was treated as a simple case of brazen plagiarism at the time, Biden also mistook the life story of former U.K. Labour Party leader Neil Kinnock when running for president in 1988.

    Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

  • New feminist Wonder Woman comic has hero enslaved as traditional, Christian wife who must reject the Bible to escape Thu, 18 Apr 2024 20:55:00 +0000


    A new Wonder Woman comic book has the hero trapped in her mind as a traditional, Christian wife who is verbally abused by her husband.

    "Wonder Woman #8," written by author Tom King, places Wonder Woman under the constraints of a villain who has bound her with the Lasso of Lies, a powerful weapon much like her own, which he uses to manipulate her mind.

    Please note that this article contains many spoilers.

    While tied up with the magical lasso, the reader learns that Wonder Woman is trapped in her mind, living as a Christian wife in a pseudo-1950s landscape with cell phones.

    Her husband is an abusive military officer who immediately takes issue with his wife's inability to deliver dinner on time. After reminding his wife, trad Wonder Woman, that he is "going out with the boys," she insists that she is "going to be better" for him.

    The comic jumps back and forth between the real world and the one created to torment her. In her traditional-hell landscape, Wonder Woman's thoughts are invaded by Bible passages that poison her mind. 1 Timothy 2:9-15 is used, which talks about women being encouraged to dress modestly and decently, learning in quiet, and not having authority over a man.

    Ephesians 5:22-24 is later cited, which says, "Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior."

    Later in the comic, Wonder Woman's husband complains about the temperature on his steak, and when asking her why she isn't eating, she says it's because she's trying to lose weight.

    "I do need to watch my figure," she states.

    After becoming enraged when Wonder Woman asks him when he will be home, the tormenting husband tells her that she may not be able to cook, but at least she looks good.

    "I shouldn't have asked. Have fun. I have so many chores around here to distract me. As much as anything can distract me from you," she said painfully.

    "You can't cook, and you never know when to shut your mouth. But dammit, you do look all right in that outfit," the husband said while embracing the emotionally damaged woman.

    Eventually, Wonder Woman escapes her mental prison but not before one more painfully written interaction with her husband. While sending her spouse into a spiral by burning his eggs, Wonder Woman is mentally battling more Bible passages.

    Titus 2:3-5 is then quoted in the comic as "women, likewise, are to be reverent in behavior. Not slanderers or slaves to much wine."

    "They are to teach what is good, and so train the young women to love their husbands and children," it goes on.

    She scolds her husband in their final interaction for not listening to her.

    Eventually, Wonder Woman's mother appears in her hallucination to remind her that she is a strong, powerful woman who can accomplish anything.

    Inspired by her mother, Wonder Woman breaks free from her confines and, while holding the villain by his throat, yells, "I do not believe your God!"

    With dialogue narrating how Wonder Woman's will can never be broken — unlike even the toughest of men — the story comes to an end in both worlds.

    In the trad world, Wonder Woman's husband is left with a departing note from his now-estranged wife.

    "Steve. My mother came by. I'm leaving with her. I am not coming back."

    "The truth is, I'm not who you think I am. I am only who I think I am."

    "P.S. The house is a little messy. And you're going to need a new vacuum."

    Steve is revealed as looking stunned while reading the note. A caption adds, "We pushed her as far as any man has ever been pushed."

    "But from the clay from which she is made, it will not crack."

    As That Park Place reported, a former DC Comics artist who worked on Suicide Squad and Justice League of America comics announced he would boycott the company over the recent tones in the Wonder Woman series.

    Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

  • Kyle Rittenhouse tells detractors at Kent State to 'cope harder' while the attacker he showed mercy to seethes outside Thu, 18 Apr 2024 20:40:00 +0000


    Kyle Rittenhouse visited Kent State University in Ohio Tuesday to speak about the importance of the Second Amendment as part of a Turning Point USA lecture series.

    As with his other recent appearances, Rittenhouse was once again met with apoplectic teens apparently convinced — perhaps because of the liberal media's various false reports — that he was a "murderer" and possibly even a racist, despite having been acquitted of all charges and shooting only white men.

    Among the radical leftists who gathered outside the Kent Student Center to protest the event was an individual who personally helped Rittenhouse understand just how critical firearms are to self-defense in America.

    Gaige Grosskreutz, who now goes by the name Paul Prediger, addressed the angry mob and made expressly clear that he has a chip on his shoulder extra to the scar on his forearm.

    The one who got away

    Grosskreutz was one of the men who swarmed Rittenhouse during a BLM riot in Kenosha, Wisconsin, on Aug. 25, 2020. Whereas the domestic abuser with multiple convictions and the violent child molester who attacked the then-17-year-old Rittenhouse died for doing so, Grosskreutz was simply disarmed with a well-placed and merciful shot.

    During Rittenhouse's murder trial, defense lawyer Corey Chirafisi asked Grosskreutz, "When you were standing three to five feet from [Rittenhouse] with your arms up in the air, he never fired, right?"

    "Correct," answered Grosskreutz.

    "It wasn't until you pointed your gun at him, advanced on him with your gun, now your hands down and pointed at him, that he fired, right?" said Chirafisi.

    "Correct," said Grosskreutz.

    While ever keen to paint himself as an innocent victim, Grosskreutz was charged with a firearm offense prior to going after the minor with a gun in 2020.

    According to the New York Post, Grosskreutz's lengthy criminal record also includes burglary, drunk driving, and a domestic incident. In 2010, he was apparently arrested and charged with smashing his grandmother in the face.

    Grosskreutz tries again to stop Rittenhouse

    The Ohio Student Association noted in a statement ahead of the protest that "Gaige Grosskreutz, surviving victim of the deadly massacre, alongside Kent students, will be hosting a press conference, followed by a teach-in, on campus to condemn Rittenhouse's status as a guest speaker and highlight the harm that his hateful and violent white supremacy inflicts on our campuses and communities."

    Despite there being no indication Rittenhouse holds any racial prejudices, the OSA further claimed Rittenhouse's presence "embodies a deeply disturbing ideology of white supremacism."

    On Tuesday, the OHA's guest of honor, Grosskreutz, indicated he was ending his silence.

    "While I've simply tried to live my life and not relive those moments, Kyle Rittenhouse has taken a different path," said Grosskreutz.

    In February 2023, Grosskreutz added Rittenhouse to the civil lawsuit he originally filed against the city and county of Kenosha along with local law enforcement officials. Rittenhouse has responded with a countersuit.

    "He has used every moment to gloat and to make light of taking life," continued the leftist. "As if that were not enough, Kyle has embraced and been embraced by those who peddle hateful rhetoric, who believe in nationalism that excludes those who do not look like or think like them, and who have sought to amplify a troubling desire for violence against supposed political, cultural, and religious enemies."

    Grosskreutz declared, "Enough of Kyle and his rhetoric, enough of the celebration of loss of human life, enough of the flawed logic because a 17-year-old who shot me and killed two others with an illegally obtained firearm, an illegally carried firearm is now somehow qualified to be a champion of gun rights."

    Grosskreutz failed in this latest attempt to stop Rittenhouse, who then took questions for nearly 40 minutes.

    "Thank God I'm still alive and here to share my story," Rittenhouse told the crowd. "Because they really wanted to kill me. And it makes a lot of these leftists upset that I'm coming to these universities to share my story. And all I can say to them is: 'Cope harder.'"

    WYSO-FM reported that during his speech, Rittenhouse called for the Ohio legislature to implement "campus carry" laws to ensure that law-abiding students have the means to defend themselves against various threats.

    "What happens if these Hamas Palestinian terrorists come to the U.S. and try to attack us?" said Rittenhouse. "Are we supposed to be left defenseless?"

    Rittenhouse's support for the Constitution and the ability for Americans to defend themselves did not resonate with the mob outside, which chanted, "Murderer!"

    Pat Millhoff, a Kent State alumnus who attended the university around the time the National Guard shot student supporters of the genocidal Red Khmers, told WYSO, "So, it's just appalling to me that they would bring this particular speaker to campus so close to May 4th."

    "I just think it's glorifying him. So I agree with free speech, but I'm just not sure this was the appropriate time and place to have this young man here," added Millhoff.

    Despite the apparent desire on campus to shut down the event, a spokeswoman for the university stated, "We cannot ban speech because it would go against a core value and because of well-established laws governing free speech on public university campuses."

    When leaving the campus, Rittenhouse thanked the protesters, telling them, "You've been a wonderful crowd. Wonderful crowd! Thank you!"

    Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

  • WATCH: Stephen A. Smith directs EPIC rant toward his liberal staffers about Trump’s political persecution Thu, 18 Apr 2024 20:32:39 +0000


    Like Joe Rogan, Elon Musk, and Bill Maher, ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith is “waking up” to the insanity that now defines the Democratic Party.

    Dave Rubin, who’s impressed with Smith’s outspokenness, plays a recent clip of the sports commentator tearing into liberals — specifically the ones working on his own staff.

    “I got liberals working for me,” Smith began, “but without looking at them, I’m going to plead to them to understand where I’m coming from.”

    “I want to emphasize that I’m not absolving Trump from anything. I’m not trying to paint him as some good guy who’s being victimized,” he prefaced, adding that “this is about the end game.”

    “You want Trump gone? Beat him!”

    “Listen to me my liberal fellas and ladies ... Is it possible that it could be perceived that you're going after Trump using lawfare because you can't beat him? Because you know the issues don't favor you?” he asked, referencing “Iran dropping bombs [on Israel],” “China issues,” “Russia invading Ukraine,” “border issues,” and “violence in the streets.”

    “That’s the argument [Trump] is going to make,” Smith predicted before pointing to the absurdity and hypocrisy of the former president’s hush money case.

    “So, let me get this straight. The 45th president of the United States, who's no longer the president of the United States at this particular moment, is in a courtroom today, eight years after he was originally elected, because he facilitated hush money to a porn star?” Smith asked.

    He then reflected on all the other politicians who have been in similar positions, including Gary Hart, Bill Clinton, and John Edwards — none of whom were persecuted to the level Trump has been.

    “That’s what we gonna do? We gonna have people in court because they lied about stuff when they were campaigning for higher office, knowing that it could derail their campaign?” he asked.

    “The point that he’s making there is the right one. He’s not telling you that Trump is the greatest man,” says Dave. “Have I had my frustrations with Trump in the last year? Yeah.”

    “But the way they are going after him is not the way that will heal America. If Donald Trump is kicked off the ballot, if Donald Trump is put in jail, if they can fine and otherwise penalize Donald Trump into oblivion and then Joe Biden becomes president again ... how do you think that will go for the rest of American history?”

    To see Smith’s epic tirade against his liberal staff, watch the clip below.


    Want more from Dave Rubin?

    To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

News Web Sites

Columnist/Blog Web Sites


This page has been visited 63 times today and 26,907 times since May 11, 2015.