DNC Reportedly May Need To Borrow Cash To Keep Lights On

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) has been grappling with infighting and a decline in donations in recent months, The New York Times reported Wednesday.

DNC Chair Ken Martin, who was elected in February, has overseen slowing fundraising from major donors, the NYT reported. Some top DNC officials have even floated the idea of whether it may be necessary to start borrowing money to continue paying the bills, according to the NYT.

Six anonymous sources told the NYT that major Democratic donors have been extremely slow to donate to the party this year. Additionally, two anonymous sources told the outlet that senior DNC officials have even floated the idea of potentially borrowing money in the coming months.

Rufus Gifford, who served as the finance chairman of former Vice President Kamala Harris’ 2024 presidential campaign, told the NYT that Democrats “need to come together and focus on the issues at hand.”

“What they are seeing is headline after headline of incompetence and infighting, and I think that is a real problem not just for the DNC but for the larger Democratic brand,” Gifford told the outlet. “We need to come together and focus on the issues at hand. That’s got to happen now. And I mean today. And if that can’t happen, we need to shift course.”

Democratic Wisconsin Rep. Mark Pocan told the NYT that the recent drama in the DNC was “worse than some high school student council drama.”

Martin told the NYT that he believes many major Democratic donors were “frustrated” by the results of the 2024 elections.

“People invested more money than they ever had before, they dug deeper than they ever had, and they are quite frustrated by the result,” Martin told the outlet. “They want answers. I don’t take it personally. I wasn’t in charge.”

“I know there’s a lot of people that are carrying grudges, that are still litigating the campaign that their person didn’t win,” Martin told the NYT. “I am not one of those people. There’s no sense of living in the past. I have no enemies other than Donald Trump and the Republican Party.”

The NYT’s report comes shortly after David Hogg, a gun control activist who was elected to serve as one of the DNC’s vice chairs in February, sparked massive backlash in the Democratic Party after he announced in April plans to primary incumbent Democrats. On June 11, the DNC voted to remove Hogg from his vice chair position and require him to run again due to a procedural complaint, Politico first reported.

On June 8, leaked audio revealed that Martin expressed concern about Hogg’s ability to lead the party due to the infighting his decisions had ignited, according to Politico. Martin notably paused twice and appeared to choke up during the recording, according to the outlet.

Moreover, Randi Weingarten, the longtime head of the American Federation of Teachers, and Lee Saunders, the president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, announced they were leaving the DNC, the NYT reported on Sunday. Both of the union leaders had backed Martin’s main opponent in the DNC chair election earlier this year, Wisconsin Democratic Party chair Ben Wikler, according to the NYT.

Still, some Democrats have defended Martin’s leadership, including Maria Cardona, a longtime DNC member, who told the NYT that he “does the work” and “rolls up the sleeves.”

“Everything that Ken has done, regardless of the drama that it has caused, has been the right moves,” Cardona told the outlet. “He does the work. He rolls up the sleeves.”

A DNC spokesperson did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

Ireland Owens

Reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

OUT OF MONEY: The DNC is Broke After USAID Got Defunded

‘Uniquely Unsuited’: NYT Ed Board Hard Passes On Socialist Mayoral Hopeful

Judge Julia Kobick Who Blocked Trump’s Latest Move Against Gender Ideology Has Deep Connections To Democrats

California Official Offers Ridiculous Excuse For State’s Inability To Quickly Declare Election Winners

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission.©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

UK: Tommy Robinson’s First Interview After Being Released from Prison

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Anyone who doubts Tommy’s explanation for why he was imprisoned just needs to look at all the people jailed for telling the truth about the Southport stabbings. The UK is a nascent Orwellian state. But it is maturing as one very quickly.

Note that Great Britain is now charging Tommy for all their legal costs for sending him to jail. I was not aware that was a thing outside of the Soviet Union.

WATCH: Tommy Robinson SPEAKS Out For FIRST Time Upon Prison Release!

Tommy has launched FightTheMail.com — a campaign to hold the media accountable and stand up for free speech. This isn’t just about one man. It’s about pushing back against a system that protects powerful interests and punishes dissent.

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Tyranny in Disguise’: Will Democracy Survive in Europe?

RELATED VIDEO: Charlie Kirk: ‘Islam is not compatible with the West. Importing millions of Muslims is suicidal.’

EDITORS NOTE: This Vald Tepes Blog column with video posted by is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

EXCLUSIVE: FCC Commissioner Wants Regulatory ‘Cows’ Lined Up ‘For The Slaughterhouse’

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Commissioner Nathan Simington outlined the regulatory “cows” his agency is “lining up for the slaughterhouse” as part of its “Delete, Delete, Delete” initiative, in an interview with the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The Trump-era deregulatory push, spearheaded by the commissioner and FCC Chair Brendan Carr, targets what Simington described as outdated broadcast media regulations — rules from the Truman administration that no longer reflect the media landscape in 2025.

“Let’s talk about profane cows, because these are the ones that we’re lining up for the slaughterhouse,” Simington told the DCNF. “I think one of the prime areas of interest for ‘Delete, Delete, Delete’ should be our broadcast media regulations. These broadcast media regulations, in many cases, come — you were talking about the Truman administration — some of them are just that old. Others are from the 1970s. They’re from an era when broadcast media was the only form of telecom media that most people had access to. Obviously, that has changed radically.”

WATCH:

The “Delete, Delete, Delete” initiative, launched in March, invites the public to flag FCC rules they believe should be scrapped. The aim, according to Simington, is to modernize the Commission’s rulebook by gutting what he called “path dependen[t]” relics from a pre-streaming era.

“In 2023, streaming subscriptions surpassed cable subscriptions in the United States, and broadcasters are not in the same kind of economic and cultural positions that they once were,” he said. “So, the idea that [broadcasters] should still be as intensely regulated as they were during that era — even if you are a believer in media regulation, which I’m not, particularly — but even if you were, the argument isn’t there anymore. There really is no argument other than path dependence and historical practice.”

The FCC is considering cuts to longstanding media ownership caps, operational restrictions and decades-old filing requirements — unless they’re explicitly mandated by Congress or the White House. Simington said that unless the president “wants it to stay,” it should be up for deletion.

“I think we should take a hard look at every media ownership rule, at every operational restriction,” the commissioner said. “And unless it’s something that’s been directly mandated by Congress, or where we have clear direction from the West Wing, that the president wants it to stay, we should consider deleting, deleting, deleting it.”

AUTHOR

Thomas English

DCNF Technology Reporter.

RELATED ARTICLE: EXCLUSIVE: Massive Telecom Merger Champions Workers In A Way Biden Admin Never Could, FCC Chair Says

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Media Participated in Coverup of Biden’s Decline, Experts Say

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

As more details continue to emerge regarding the alarming extent of former President Joe Biden’s mental and physical incapacities while serving in the most powerful office in the world, insiders are pointing out that the mainstream media willingly followed the lead of White House officials who insisted that Biden was perfectly fit to perform his duties despite a multitude of audio and video evidence showing otherwise.

According to a new book coming out this week by CNN reporter Jake Tapper and Axios reporter Alex Thompson entitled “Original Sin,” Biden’s cognitive decline began almost a decade before his 2024 presidential campaign for reelection, when glaring examples of Biden’s mental and physical struggles began occurring in front of cameras on a weekly basis. “Those close to him say that the first signs he was deteriorating emerged after the death of his beloved son Beau in 2015,” Tapper and Thompson write. A ghostwriter for Biden admitted in 2017 that he “was really struggling. … His cognitive capacity seemed to have been failing him.”

Despite the clear signs of Biden’s decline to those in his inner circle years before the 2020 election, his enablers pushed ahead with his presidential campaign. By 2021, Biden’s closest aides began scripting Cabinet meetings, to the point that his agency secretaries would be asked ahead of a meeting, “‘Well, what are you going to ask? If he asks a certain question, what is your answer going to be?’” By the beginning of 2023, the president’s cognitive condition had become so serious that senior White House aides were attempting to “shield him from his own staff so many people didn’t realize the extent of the decline.” Even Cabinet secretaries were eventually “kept at bay” and “didn’t get a chance to interact with the President.” The truth was that “five people were running the country,” an unnamed source close to the Biden administration told Tapper and Thompson.

Despite this, no members of Biden’s Cabinet came forward to reveal what was happening. “When they would complain internally, they were told, ‘He’s fine, be quiet,’” Tapper noted in a New Yorker interview. As Tapper and Thompson wrote, however, “The presidency requires someone who can perform at 2:00 a.m. during an emergency. Cabinet secretaries in his own administration told us that by 2024, he could not be relied upon for this.”

As observed by National Review, Biden’s inner circle “admitted to each other that Biden was becoming so physically frail that he might need to use a wheelchair in his second term. But their primary concern appeared to be that nothing be seen that would endanger his reelection — or their own hold on power, which they enjoyed as a result of Biden’s weakness.”

Notably, mainstream media reporters such as Tapper himself spent much of Biden’s term reacting with incredulity whenever the topic of the president’s fitness for office surfaced in the news. As National Review has pointed out, Tapper castigated Republicans like Lara Trump on air as far back as 2020 for highlighting Biden’s cognitive decline. “How do you think it makes little kids with stutters feel when they see you make a comment like that?” he snapped. Less than a year before his book “Original Sin” was released, he stated on air, “[Biden] is sharp mentally.” Tapper also insisted that a Wall Street Journal article published in June 2024 included “false claims … about President Biden’s mental fitness and acuity.” He also derisively dismissed the article on the grounds that WSJ is “owned by News Corp which is run by the Murdochs.” Tapper even remarked during a segment with Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), “[Biden]’s 81, and his memory, you know, it doesn’t seem great, it’s not horrible, but I don’t understand the outrage.”

Experts like Federalist Editor-in-Chief Mollie Hemingway say that the media’s peculiar lack of curiosity about Biden’s noticeable decline must be held to account. “This was a man who was president until January of this year — holding nuclear codes,” she pointed out on Fox News. “Anyone who was involved in suppressing information about the true state of his mental decline should absolutely be asked questions about that, be held to account. And until the media start moving things in that direction, where you’re actually talking to the people who knew and what they did to cover this up, and how the media themselves were co-conspirators in that, there’s no accountability being had.”

Some accountability on the matter may be coming. The House Oversight Committee announced last week that it would “continue its investigation into the cover-up of President Biden’s mental decline and use of autopen.”

In comments to The Washington Stand, FRC Action Director Matt Carpenter observed that the results of the 2024 election were partly in reaction to how Biden’s staff, reelection campaign, and the Democratic Party attempted to cover up the former president’s cognitive decline.

“As many suspected, former President Biden was never up to the task of running the country,” he noted. “Early in his presidency, it became clear President Biden was not up to the job when his administration would call it a day at 4 p.m. As soon as Special Counsel Robert Hur’s report surfaced and his recommendation against pressing charges for Biden because he was a ‘well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory,’ many understood what Hur was really saying: Biden is suffering from cognitive decline.”

“This fact puts into question every policy decision, personnel decision, pardon, and other action from the Oval Office,” Carpenter concluded. “Contrast this with the high-energy pace set by President Trump in his second term, and the American people should be encouraged to raise their expectations for our nation’s top executive.”

AUTHOR

Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

House Dems’ Storming of ICE Facility Pulled Page from New Left’s Violent Past

AOC’s Bronx and Queens Suffer Huge Crime Spike

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Government Censorship Project Boasted of Suppressing Trump Message, Defunding Newsrooms

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

For years, my colleagues and I have been fighting this enormous machine of censorship. We knew it was an immense machine but we did not know the US government was behind it.

Key group in government censorship project boasted of suppressing Trump message, defunding newsrooms

Democracy Dies in Darkness? A new memo from the taxpayer-funded National Endowment for Democracy shows grantee Global Disinformation Index viewed silencing Trump and toxifying certain news outlets to reduce their revenues as a win. The policy spread to other federal programs.

By Steven Richards and John Solomon, Just The News, May 19, 2025:

A nonprofit that received federal funding to develop censorship strategies boasted in progress reports to the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) that early tactics had suppressed the reach of Donald Trump’s messaging and reduced advertising by $100 million to news outlets it deemed to be “disinformation” spreaders, according to newly disclosed memos.

The Global Disinformation Index (GDI) was awarded grants through its U.S.-based affiliate, AN Foundation, from NED, a congressionally chartered and taxpayer-funded agency in Washington. The grants were paid to develop strategies on how to fight perceived disinformation in foreign countries.

But GDI’s quarterly progress reports often explicitly boasted about the impact of censorship efforts on American targets and audiences.

For instance, it touted to the NED that it had created a report called “Bankrolling Bigotry: An Overview of the Online Funding Strategies of American Hate Groups” that relied heavily on research from the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center to warn that “hatred is surging across the United States, threatening the safety, security and wellbeing of minority communities.”

You can read that report here: bankrolling-bigotry-3.pdf

Demonetization: Trying to bankrupt news outlets

Similarly, it boasted about its recommended tactics. Specifically, urging advertisers to choke revenue to news outlets that the index deemed to spread disinformation had an enormous early impact, it wrote.

“This period, we turned our minds to evaluation of GDI’s impact; specifically, to how we might measure the demonetization achieved through uptake of our risk ratings by brands and/or ad tech platforms,” GDI wrote. Demonetization refers to the practice of pressuring advertisers and gaming search engines in order to reduce, or even remove, earnings from YouTube and other social media platforms relied upon by publishers.

Partnering with a “trusted ad tech analytics organization,” GDI estimated that during a 15-month period, from March 2020 to September 2021, the number of bids sent to the approximately 1,200 sites listed on its “Dynamic Exclusion List” was halved, leading to an estimated $100 million lost in collective revenue, the memo says.

You can read GDI’s grant agreement with NED and quarterly narrative reports below:
NED-GDI Grant Agreement and Quarterly Narrative Reports.pdf

GDI’s own index identified 10 American news media outlets as superspreaders of disinformation, almost all of them conservative voices, like The New York Post, The Daily Wire, Newsmax, The Federalist, and The Blaze, among others. The memos mentioned that, combined, the outlets identified by the index lost advertising, but did not identify them by name.

Michael Chamberlain, head of the nonprofit watchdog Protect the Public’s Trust, which obtained the documents under the Freedom of Information Act, said the memos proved that while NED’s effort was billed as targeting overseas propaganda, it ended up routinely focusing on suppressing American speech, mostly right-leaning or conservative in nature.

“The Censorship Industrial Complex was hard at work early in this decade, and they were using taxpayer dollars to do so,” Chamberlain told Just the News in an interview. “They effectively gave funding to GDI to look at disinformation, misinformation in foreign countries, such as countries in Africa, Asia, Latin America—Nigeria, India, Malaysia, Mexico are mentioned specifically in the grant application.”

Selectively suppressing political speech

Perhaps its most stark admission came when it cited a New York Times article on how the censorship industry’s effort to shut down Trump’s social media presence had undercut the former and future president’s reach and amplification. GDI bragged in the progress report about the “wider context” of its work that included research on Donald Trump’s social media reach after he was deplatformed by most U.S. social media apps in the wake of Jan. 6 and his departure from office.

“Our press coverage during the quarter included a front-page article in The New York Times citing GDI research on the dramatic drop in reach of Trump’s statements once the bullhorn of the social media algorithms was removed,” the group touted.

Mike Benz, the founder of the Foundation for Freedom Online and a major anti-censorship activist, said the documents were stunning and disturbing.

“I am absolutely disgusted by these revelations, as should be every American and every world citizen to see the US government, under the Biden administration, actively funding a full-out campaign to pressure advertisers to defund private independent news sites who competed with the Biden State Department’s media narratives,” Benz told Just the News.

“Everyone involved in this should be fired, and frankly, NED itself must be defunded,” he added.

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

POST ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

EXCLUSIVE: Harmeet Dhillon Reveals What’s Next For ‘Notorious’ DOJ Office That Was Weaponized Under Biden

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

After the Biden administration spent four years “weaponizing” her division, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon says that she needs more “energized attorneys” to help her spearhead new initiatives to protect rights that have been trampled on in the past years.

The priorities pursued in the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Civil Rights Division by her predecessor Kristen Clarke — prosecuting pro-life activists, suing states over election integrity efforts and targeting police departments — are going to change, Dhillon told the Daily Caller News Foundation during a Friday interview.

Under her leadership, Dhillon said the Civil Rights Division will continue its core mission, while expanding to new areas of focus including defending the Second Amendment, ending race discrimination in employment, securing parental rights and fighting antisemitism on college campuses.

Some current and former career attorneys in the division are claiming the shifts in policy will undermine civil rights enforcement. Last week, around a dozen senior lawyers in the division were reassigned, Reuters reported.

“We have changed the priorities, not the mission, the priorities, in each of the sections in the Civil Rights Division,” Dhillon told the DCNF. “Some personnel here have decided that they’d rather make their careers elsewhere.”

WATCH:

The following interview has been edited for the sake of length and clarity.

A lot of Americans were concerned over the past four years how this division has been one of the most weaponized in the DOJ. What did you walk into three weeks ago when you came in?

The Civil Rights Division is one of the largest litigating departments of the United States Department of Justice, and you’re correct, a lot of the most notorious, headline-grabbing policies out of the Biden DOJ came from the Civil Rights Division.

For example, the Civil Rights Division was responsible for challenging Georgia’s election laws. The DOJ took it upon itself to harass Georgia over doing the right thing. The DOJ Civil Rights Division spent a lot of resources persecuting Christians for praying outside abortion clinics, not violently, not in any way obstructing people, just praying. That’s outrageous, and we’ve dismissed those prosecutions. The Civil Rights Division has been bringing and maintaining, I think, pretty flimsy cases against police departments and other law enforcement agencies for alleged statistical anomalies in arrest rates, very small anomalies. Statistics are easily manipulated.

We are here to absolutely punish misconduct by the police, by employers, by housing agencies that discriminate against people, by educational institutions that discriminate against students and a whole host of other civil rights statutes. There’s human trafficking, certain human trafficking statues come under our purview.

We’re required to enforce the federal civil rights laws. So all of that is going to continue to be done under the Civil Rights Division, disability law and all of that, but the emphasis is going to be different. It isn’t going to be on opening up investigations and harassing people endlessly and maintaining 40-and 50-year-old consent decrees. It’s going to be examining wrongdoing or alleged wrongdoing and determining quickly whether it occurred or not. If it does, we’ll go after it. If it doesn’t, we’ll move on.

More importantly, I think the rights of ordinary Americans over the last years have been stripped and violated. The First Amendment: during COVID, we saw so many violations of civil rights in every single area, which is something that I took on as a private lawyer. The FACE [Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances] Act can be used to protect clinics where women get counseling about their options for abortion, and 200 of those have been violently attacked, firebombed, picketed and otherwise been obstructed over the last few years with zero action from the DOJ. That’s going to change.

We have changed the priorities, not the mission, the priorities, in each of the sections in the Civil Rights Division. Some personnel here have decided that they’d rather make their careers elsewhere. So there’ll be quite a bit of turnover here in the Civil Rights Division.

What does that look like as far as staffing? Do you have enough attorneys to execute those new priorities that you’re hoping to focus on?

Love more. We’re waiting for, you know, throughout the federal government, people are being offered an opportunity to take severance that pays them for five months, and they don’t have to work anymore. They still stay on our books, so, you know, from the bean counter’s perspective I have all those people.

But reality is, not only are we going to continue the mission of the Civil Rights Division, the traditional, core functions, there are a lot of new functions that our president wants us to be looking at, and new functions that I want to do. For example, the Second Amendment is a civil right. The Civil Rights Division has never gone after states that systematically violate our right under Bruen and other Supreme decisions to carry weapons, to bear arms, to keep them in our homes. We’re going to be doing that in the Civil Rights Division.

I mentioned the FACE act, different applications of the FACE act. Rampant antisemitism on college campuses is going to come to an end under our purview. Employers that discriminate against people on the basis of race and use quotas in hiring that are in no way justified, public sector employers, will be getting inquiries from us, and so that’s a new priority that wasn’t being done before. That’s almost every employer in America, unfortunately, certainly in the public sector. We’re taking on de-banking practices.

These are all new things. I’m going to need new, energized attorneys dedicated to this mission. Once we finish this reorganization, and finish the severance process, we’ll be hiring again.

What are some of the lessons you learned from your private practice in the past that you’re bringing into your role here?

I am the rare thing of a conservative civil rights lawyer almost my entire career. So for 18 years, I had my own law firm. For six years, I had a nonprofit that I founded. Both of those, well, one, represented the president in his campaign and his personal life, and many prominent people whose speech rights were violated.

That’s something I’m very passionate about, the First Amendment. But during COVID, we saw every American’s rights trampled on in so many different ways. I filed more lawsuits during COVID than any other lawyer in the United States to challenge governors and local officials stripping away people’s private rights. So these are some of the things that I intend to bring to bear here.

I’ve been a lawyer for the Second Amendment community. I’ve been a lawyer for the pro-life community. Very passionate about all of those areas. I’m not here to do my priorities. I’m here to do the president’s priorities, which happen to overlap a lot with my priorities.

Another priority that Trump signed an executive order on is child gender mutilation and the transgender issue. Could you address specifically what actions you might be taking in the future? How you might be dealing with doctors, medical malpractice cases?

I can’t be specific because that wouldn’t be appropriate, but I can tell anyone to look at my record. In my private practice, in my nonprofit, I represented four prominent young women who detransitioned — Chloe Cole, Luka Hein, Clementine Breen and one other. These girls and their families were sold a package of lies. They were subjected to medical malpractice, and frankly, doctors looked the other way on their actual medical issues and put them on this conveyor belt. Thankfully, each of them realized they made a terrible mistake, and they’ll never get their breasts back. Thankfully, worse wasn’t done to them.

The president and the attorney general have emphasized that we need to be using female genital mutilation statutes that bar female genital mutilation on girls under the age of 18, a barbaric practice that we condemn around the world, but do right here in the United States. That doesn’t protect boys, unfortunately, but we will aggressively be looking at the extent to which doctors, medical institutions, public institutions, UCSF, and you know, all these public institutions around the country, have been violating the civil rights of American families.

Some states are systematically destroying parental rights, which is a civil right, by enabling the smuggling of children across the state borders to obtain this destructive treatment and surgery. That’s illegal, in my opinion, and it may violate human trafficking statutes. So there are a number of things that we’re going to look at.

WATCH:

On the religious liberty front, I know you’ve spoken a lot about that. Earlier this week, there was a meeting of the anti-Christian Bias Task Force. What do you see as the biggest issue in the religious liberty space?

Well there’s so many. I’ve mentioned some of them, but I think there’s open hostility to religion in many sectors of our society.

We’ve had presidents mock people who cling to their faith. People who sought medical exemptions from the COVID vaccine during that terrible era, were fired from our military, were fired from jobs all over the United States. There’s active anti-Christian hostility in the military, in various government agencies. Chaplains are told not to preach their faith if they’re Christian. I mean, there’s so many things. Secretary Hegseth went over those at our meeting. And State Department Secretary Rubio talked about examples over there.

We have federal statutes that protect religion, not just the First Amendment, but there’s the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. We’ve brought several cases in the DOJ Civil Rights Division to protect houses of worship, Christian and others. It’s an important right that we have, and we need to protect people of faith, even in prisons. People who have committed crimes don’t lose their religious rights. I’m very passionate about that issue, and have spent my entire 32 year career working to represent the rights of people of faith.

On election security, I also wanted to ask you, what can be done about states that are allowing non-citizens on voter rolls? What role will the Civil Rights Division have in those issues?

We have a role. We administer the Voting Rights Act, the Help America Vote Act, the National Voter Registration Act. Those are specific statutes. What we are not is the all purpose law enforcement agency of elections. Americans need to understand that most of our election laws are based in the states. However, there are these federal laws.

As a lawyer for many candidates over the years, and having been a candidate myself, I’m very passionate about that. And as an immigrant to this country, I think it’s outrageous that people conflate immigrant and illegal immigrant and [say] ‘nobody should be asking for anybody’s ID.’ It’s 2025. Everyone in America who’s here legally can easily get an ID. So that’s nonsense.

I do think that we need to be enforcing voter ID laws, allowing them, enabling them and making it easier for anyone who is legally entitled to vote in the United States to vote easily. That’s the bottom line. So the hostility that we see from one side politically and from judges to this basic concept, we have to work around it. There may be legislative solutions that are required, but whatever we can do at the DOJ to make sure that our elections are fair, safe and reliable, we will be doing.

You mentioned judges. There’s been a lot of talk about district court judges overriding the president, a lot of the executive orders. What do you think the answer is there?

Oh, that’s the heavy one. And I have to appear in front of these judges, so I will not say exactly what I think about some of these judges and their rulings. What I will say is that we have a runaway trend of judges, you know, substituting their judgment for the president’s. That is not what separation of powers means. I’ll leave it at that. I’m involved in several active cases. I can’t really take a position any more than this.

Finally, what would you say Americans should expect from the Civil Rights Division over the next four years? What’s your final message?

Well, they can expect that we’ll be enforcing the federal civil rights statutes. They can expect that the emphasis of that enforcement is going to be more towards the president’s agenda. He has many executive orders out there that I fully agree with and he has a right as an executive, the person that the American people chose to be our president, to direct that agenda.

Now, that doesn’t mean we’re going to stop doing traditional work, like the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) is an important statute. Discrimination is bad. Violence at any house of worship or any health care facility is unacceptable, and all those statutes are going to be enforced. But we will not be weaponizing the federal government against law abiding citizens, against law abiding employers, against police departments that are trying to do the right thing and are largely doing the right thing. But if you’re enabling violent and obstructive, antisemitic protests on your campus, and I have jurisdiction, you will not be doing that.

AUTHOR

Katelynn Richardson

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: DOJ Slashes Hundreds Of Grants To Restorative Justice, ‘Toxic’ Masculinity Programs

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

100 DAYS OF HOAXES: Cutting Through the Outright and Disinformation of Fake News

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

The White House called out the ‘nonstop deluge of hoaxes and lies from Democrats and their allies in the Fake News’

The White House released a list of the “most egregious hoaxes” perpetuated by the media in the first 100 days of President Donald Trump’s second term Tuesday.

The Trump administration published a press release declaring, “Since President Donald J. Trump took office 100 days ago, it has been a nonstop deluge of hoaxes and lies from Democrats and their allies in the Fake News suffering from terminal cases of Trump Derangement Syndrome.”

The administration went on to list 57 purported “hoaxes” spread by the president’s critics, the media and Democrats.

Since President Donald J. Trump took office 100 days ago, it has been a nonstop deluge of hoaxes and lies from Democrats and their allies in the Fake News suffering from terminal cases of Trump Derangement Syndrome.

In no particular order, here are some of the most egregious hoaxes peddled by the usual suspects so far in President Trump’s second term:

  • HOAX: Fake News CNN attempted to “fact check” President Trump’s claim that the Biden Administration spent millions on “making mice transgender.”
  • FACT: After their so-called “fact check” was thoroughly debunked, they were forced to update it in disgrace and admit the claim was, in fact, true.
  • HOAX: The Fake News claimed the Department of Defense removed Gen. Colin Powell’s name from a list of notable Americans buried at Arlington Cemetery.
  • FACT: No service members’ names were removed from that section — and Gen. Powell’s name remains among those listed.
  • HOAX: Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) claimed “no president” presided over more plane crashes during their first month in office as President Trump.
  • FACT: “There were 55 aviation accidents in the U.S. between Biden’s inauguration on Jan. 21, 2021, and Feb. 17, 2021, compared to 35 during the same period for Trump,” Fox News reported.
  • HOAX: Gov. JB Pritzker (D-IL) and Chicago Public Schools officials claimed, without bothering to verify, that ICE agents had conducted a “raid” at an elementary school — a false claim echoed by media outlets, including the Chicago Tribune.
  • FACT: It was actually the U.S. Secret Service investigating a threat unrelated to immigration.
  • HOAX: Far-left influencers and other leftist hacks falsely claimed the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and Elon Musk were out to “cut Social Security.”
  • FACT: They were referencing an interview in which Musk was clearly referring to the tremendous amount of waste, fraud, and abuse within entitlement programs.
  • HOAX: The media smeared DOGE as “young, inexperienced engineers” engineering a “government takeover.”
  • FACT: In reality, DOGE is led by seasoned industry professionals, including successful CEOs who paused their lives to aid in the effort of streamlining government and holding the bureaucracy accountable.
  • HOAX: NBC’s Peter Alexander peddled the lie that “constituents in some traditionally red districts” were unhappy with President Trump’s effort to cut waste, fraud, and abuse in government.
  • FACT: The same “protests” cited by the Fake News were funded and organized by far-left special interest groups.
  • HOAX: NPR claimed NASA astronauts Suni Williams and Butch Wilmore — who were stuck on the International Space Station for more than nine months following problems with their spacecraft — were “not stranded.”
  • FACT: NPR itself had described the astronauts as stranded in prior reporting, and only seemed to take issue with the description once President Trump and Elon Musk made it a priority to bring them home.
  • HOAX: A foreign Fake News outlet reported that President Trump “shut down” the British prime minister during a news conference.
  • FACT: In reality, President Trump was simply moving on from a reporter who was trying to goad the two leaders into division.
  • HOAX: NPR falsely claimed the White House was actively searching for a new secretary of defense.
  • FACT: This lie was immediately shut down by multiple Trump Administration officials, including President Trump himself.
  • HOAX: The Fake News attempted to paint illegal immigrant gang member Kilmar Abrego Garcia as an innocent “Maryland father” who was unjustly deported by the Trump Administration — and actively censored the truth about him.
  • FACT: Abrego Garcia is a citizen of El Salvador and was deported to his home country amid overwhelming evidence of his gang affiliation.
  • HOAX: Deranged “filmmaker” Michael Moore questioned whether deported illegal immigrants would go on to cure cancer or stop “that asteroid (sic) that’s gonna hit us.”
  • FACT: Moore’s statement was a strong early contender for the dumbest, most ridiculous statement of the year considering those deported illegal immigrants were violent criminals.
  • HOAX: The Fake News portrayed Mahmoud Khalil, a pro-Hamas radical who led violent protests at Columbia, as an innocent graduate student with an absolute right to remain in the U.S.
  • FACT: An immigration judge ruled Khalil — who is not a U.S. citizen — can be deported.
  • HOAX: The Financial Times reported that Senior White House Counselor Peter Navarro wanted to remove Canada from the “Five Eyes” intelligence sharing network.
  • FACT: Mr. Navarro immediately shut down this fake story.
  • HOAX: A foreign Fake News reporter claimed President Trump referred to European nations as “parasites.”
  • FACT: President Trump immediately pushed back on this ridiculous claim — as did the Italian prime minister.
  • HOAX: Fake News CNN’s Brianna Keilar implied the Trump Administration was somehow wrong for stopping illegal immigrants from stealing taxpayer dollars in the form of welfare benefits.
  • FACT: Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller summarily embarrassed her with the facts: “The federal government will find EVERY illegal alien who is stealing American taxpayer dollars — and that’s what Americans expect to happen. I don’t even fathom the premise of your question.”
  • HOAX: A favorite refrain of the Fake News is that Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., is “anti-vaccine.”
  • FACT: Kennedy debunked the lie in his confirmation hearings: “This has been repeatedly debunked … Bringing this up right now is dishonest.”
  • HOAX: WIRED falsely claimed the Social Security Administration is “shifting its public communication exclusively to X” under President Trump.
  • FACT: Not happening.
  • HOAX: Reuters falsely reported that the Trump Administration “stalled a United Nations program in Mexico aimed at stopping imported fentanyl chemicals from reaching the country’s drug cartels.”
  • FACT: The Department of State is actually trying to expand the initiative.
  • FACT: The Fake News frequently pushed the lie that as part of the Trump administration, Secretary Kennedy would implement a national abortion ban and “restrict or even ban medication abortion without a single act of Congress.”
  • FACT: Secretary Kennedy consistently pledged to implement President Trump’s policies — which include leaving abortion to the states, ending barbaric late-term abortions, protecting conscientious objections, and ending federal funding for abortions.
  • HOAX: Fake News savant Tara Palmeri falsely reported that President Trump’s proposal for Gaza was conceived by Jared Kushner.
  • FACT: This lie was immediately and summarily debunked by the Trump Administration: “The worst reporter in America makes up fake news for clout because she has no real sources. Sit down, dummy.”
  • HOAX: Sen. Chris Murphy, Rep. Jasmine Crockett, and media outlets claimed President Trump’s directive to pause radical, wasteful government spending meant an end to Medicaid, food assistance, and other individual assistance programs.
  • FACT: Individual assistance programs — Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SNAP, etc. — were explicitly excluded, as was made clear by Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt and the Office of Management and Budget. Only unnecessary spending — DEI, Green New Scam, NGOs that undermine the national interest — were included in the directive.
  • HOAX: A “physicians advocacy group” was widely cited as opposing President Trump’s nomination of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., to lead the Department of Health and Human Services.
  • FACT: The “advocacy group” was really an astroturfed partisan organization funded by prominent left-wing donors — and accepted fake signatures.
  • HOAX: Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) and other Democrats pushed the lie that DOGE posted “classified information” on their website.
  • FACT: That alleged “classified information” was really just an employment headcount — which has been publicly available for years.
  • HOAX: Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) claimed Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem called all Venezuelan immigrants “dirtbags.”
  • FACT: Secretary Noem actually called illegal immigrant members of the vicious Tren de Aragua gang “dirtbags,” which is true.
  • HOAX: The New York Times wrote that Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., wanted to “ban fluoride in drinking water” and “reverse … one of the most important public health practices in the country’s history.”
  • FACT: New York Times made no mention of their own reporting that fluoride may be “linked to lower IQ scores in children.”
  • HOAX: Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) repeatedly lied about President Trump “going after” Social Security.
  • FACT: President Trump has repeatedly pledged to protect Social Security and make it more robust for American citizens.
  • HOAX: Sen. Mark Kelley (D-AZ) attempted to scare veterans by shamelessly claiming their care was in jeopardy due to “layoffs” at VA hospitals.
  • FACT: The lie was debunked by Secretary of Veterans Affairs Doug Collins: “What changes are you talking about? We’ve not had those layoffs… I put $360 million back into community care… It’s concerning to me that a veteran would actually tell stories to veterans that are not true.”
  • HOAX: Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) exploited the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport plane crash tragedy by claiming President Trump “froze the hiring” of air traffic controllers.
  • FACT: Air traffic controllers were exempt from the federal hiring freeze.
  • HOAX: Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) implied that “cutting” members of an aviation advisory committee was somehow a cause of the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport plane crash tragedy.
  • FACT: The advisory group hadn’t met since 2023 and was comprised of business and union leaders who gave “advice” to the TSA and had nothing to do with actual air travel.
  • HOAX: A far-left writer claimed Elon Musk and DOGE staffers “illegally installed a commercial server to control federal HR databases that contain sensitive personal information, including SSNs, home addresses, and medical histories.”
  • FACT: A top official confirmed “there’s nothing illegal and no server, just more made up tall tales from uninformed career bureaucrats.”
  • HOAX: The Washington Post alleged the Trump Administration was setting “quotas” for immigration authorities — and gave the administration just four minutes to comment before publishing.
  • FACT: As usual, this was a fake story.
  • HOAX: Online liberal activists claimed President Trump “took down” President Obama’s portrait in the White House.
  • FACT: Obama’s portrait was not taken down — it was simply moved only feet away from its previous location.
  • HOAX: Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI) claimed Attorney General Pam Bondi created a “weaponizing task force.”
  • FACT: It was a task force to END weaponization at the Department of Justice.
  • HOAX: CBS News reported that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth ordered a “makeup studio” be installed inside the Pentagon.
  • FACT: It was a “totally fake story,” and the alleged studio was really an existing green room with no frills.
  • HOAX: Politico reported the Trump Administration was debating lifting sanctions on Russian energy assets, including the Nord Stream pipeline.
  • FACT: This was debunked by both Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff.
  • HOAX: An illegal immigrant in U.S. custody “simply disappeared,” The New York Times reported.
  • FACT: The illegal immigrant was a confirmed member of the vicious Tren de Aragua gang. An immigration judge ordered his removal, and he was deported along with other threats to national security.
  • HOAX: The Wall Street Journal alleged that Special Envoy Steve Witkoff was receiving sensitive information on a personal phone while in Moscow and that Russian Intelligence must’ve had access to the information.
  • FACT: This was a total fabrication. Special Envoy Witkoff did not even have a personal phone with him in Russia. He had only a government phone; a secure line of communication.
  • HOAX: The Wall Street Journal claimed the Trump Administration “sought to portray” deported criminal illegal immigrant gang member Kilmar Abrego Garcia as “violent.”
  • FACT: Abrego Garcia’s own wife filed an order of protection against him and testified that he brutally beat her.
  • HOAX: An AP reporter claimed that FAA staff who worked on “radar, landing and navigational aid maintenance, among others” were “harassed on Facebook” by DOGE.
  • FACT: That was a total lie. DOGE doesn’t have a Facebook page and no professionals who perform critical safety functions were fired.
  • HOAX: The Daily Beast claimed Vice President JD Vance “broke one of the most notorious Vatican rules during his Easter weekend visit” by being photographed in the Sistine Chapel.
  • FACT: Buried all the way down in the 14th paragraph, The Daily Beast admitted the vice president was given special permission by the Vatican to have photographs taken inside the Sistine Chapel.
  • HOAX: Left-wing social media accounts promoted fake, AI-generated audio of Vice President Vance “disparaging Elon Musk in private.”
  • FACT: The audio was debunked as fake.
  • HOAX: The New York Times reported that funding for the Women’s Health Initiative was being slashed by the Department of Health and Human Services.
  • FACT: Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., himself declared this Fake News and recognized the project is “mission critical.”
  • HOAX: Fox News’s Jennifer Griffin gave legitimacy to a hoax from delusional Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) and Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth requested nearly $140,000 in “upgrades” to his government residence.
  • FACT: This lie was debunked by Secretary Hegseth — and it was so outrageous, even the AP was forced to admit it was completely fake.
  • HOAX: Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA) and many others claimed the Supreme Court ordered the return of illegal immigrant gang member Kilmar Abrego Garcia to the United States.
  • FACT: Even CNN admitted that’s not what happened: “They did not order the administration to return him to the United States … they could’ve said ‘we order him returned,’ but they didn’t do that.”
  • HOAX: Joe Biden accused the Trump Administration of “taking aim at Social Security.”
  • FACT: As usual, he was lying — President Trump has repeatedly pledged to protect Social Security.
  • HOAX: Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) claimed the arrest of a Milwaukee judge who helped an illegal immigrant evade arrest was “unprecedented.”
  • FACT: It wasn’t; it has happened before.
  • HOAX: Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) called the arrest of a Milwaukee judge who helped an illegal immigrant evade arrest a “gravely serious and drastic move.”
  • FACT: The judge violated the law by obstructing an ICE arrest of an illegal immigrant.
  • HOAX: Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) claimed the arrest of the Milwaukee judge who obstructed an apprehension of a criminal illegal immigrant “threatens the rule of law.”
  • FACT: It literally does the opposite because no one is above the law.
  • HOAX: Politico claimed the Trump Administration “wipe[d] out firefighter health and safety programs.”
  • FACT: The programs remain a top priority for the administration — and will remain intact.
  • HOAX: Sen. Elizabeth Warren claimed that President Trump’s policies make it so “no one wants to make investments in the United States.”
  • FACT: President Trump has secured more than $5 trillion in investments since taking office, which is expected to create more than 451,000 new jobs — and the list is only expected to grow.
  • HOAX: NBC’s Kristen Welker peddled a Fake News hoax that the Trump Administration was deporting children.
  • FACT: Secretary of State Marco Rubio shut down her desperate attempt at a hoax by highlighting how the mother, who was in the country illegally, made that choice all on her own.
  • HOAX: The New York Times implied President Trump was alone in wearing a blue suit to the funeral of Pope Francis.
  • FACT: Photos show dozens of world leaders and other attendees — many situated near President Trump — also wearing blue clothing.
  • HOAX: Teachers’ union boss Randi Weingarten accused President Trump of taking teachers’ salaries and giving them to “billionaires” by cutting the Department of Education.
  • FACT: President Trump has repeatedly called teachers “the most important people in this country” who should be paid more, not less. The federal government does not pay the salaries of teachers; state and local governments do.
  • HOAX: The Fake News and their predictable allies ran with a story that claimed an American citizen was detained by authorities after he informed them he was, in fact, a citizen.
  • FACT: That’s not what happened. The individual “approached Border Patrol in Tucson and stated he had entered the U.S. illegally through Nogales. He said he wanted to turn himself in and completed a sworn statement identifying as a Mexican citizen who had entered unlawfully … A few days later, his family presented documents showing U.S. citizenship. The charges were dismissed, and he was released to his family.”
  • HOAX: PBS News claimed “DOGE operatives attempted to gain access to secure spaces,” implying they attempted to access classified information without approval.
  • FACT: This wasn’t even remotely true.
  • HOAX: The AP falsely claimed Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said President Trump is “very good friends” with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
  • FACT: The AP was humiliatingly forced to retract its story, admitting they were wrong. Stephanie Ruhle also had to issue a correction. DNI Gabbard was referencing President Trump’s relationship with Indian PM Narendra Modi.
  • HOAX: Student visa holders should have unfettered access to do whatever they want in the United States.
  • FACT: Wrong. As Secretary of State Marco Rubio said, “When you apply to enter the United States and you get a visa, you are a guest… If you tell us when you apply for a visa ‘I’m coming to the U.S. to participate in pro-Hamas events,’ that runs counter to the foreign policy interest of the United States… If you had told us you were going to do that, we never would have given you the visa.”

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLE: ENEMEDIA: ABC, NBC and CBS Hit Trump With 92% Negative Coverage of His Presidency, Study Finds

POSTS ON X:

RELATED VIDEO: MILLER TIME: Trump Admin Will Force ‘Jerks’ in the Media Mob to Cover Illegal Migrant ‘Atrocities’

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

One Court Case Could Totally Upend Google’s Search Engine Empire

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Google’s search engine empire could face a serious reckoning as the Justice Department’s landmark antitrust case entered its remedies phase Monday, handing a federal judge the power to dismantle the tech behemoth’s illegal monopoly over how users discover information online.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia already ruled in August that Google illegally maintained a “monopoly” in general search markets, mainly through billion-dollar deals to secure exclusive default status on mobile devices and browsers. Now, Judge Amit Mehta will decide how far the government can go to unwind said monopoly — with potential remedies ranging from prohibiting exclusivity agreements to forcing divestiture of Chrome or Android, interventions that could deliver a serious blow to the company’s entire business model.

“You’re ultimately trying to resolve the particular harm that you’ve seen,” Luke Hogg, director of technology policy at the Foundation for American Innovation, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “And whether or not Google’s control of Chrome or Google’s control of Android is contributory to their general size and market position is secondary to questions of how that actually helped in their monopolization of search.”

Mehta’s forthcoming remedy could bar Google from continuing exclusivity deals with Apple, Samsung and Android device manufacturers — a core part of the company’s current business model. Though the DOJ doubled down in March on pursuing more drastic measures, like forcing Google to spin off Chrome or Android entirely, Hogg said that’s unlikely to happen.

“There’s middle ground points where you can get to greater competition in those markets without totally spinning it off,” Hogg said, pointing to historical precedent. “If you go back and look at the Microsoft case and the consent decree there, they get to this middle ground point where there’s a lot of openness requirements, interoperability requirements, banning of exclusivity deals and things like that.”

Hogg was referencing the DOJ’s 1998 lawsuit against Microsoft, which charged the company with using its dominance in PC operating systems to crush rival Netscape by bundling Internet Explorer with Windows. Though the court initially ordered a breakup, the case ultimately ended in a consent decree that imposed interoperability rules and banned certain exclusivity deals — a potential blueprint for reining in Google without tearing it apart.

Such a ruling — that is, enforcing interoperability requirements and exclusivity bans rather than forcing breakups or divestiture — could rattle Google’s financial relationships with key partners, particularly Apple, Samsung and Mozilla — companies that have long enjoyed billion-dollar benefits from default placement deals. Apple previously indicated it would likely keep Google as the default search engine on Safari even without those payments, but the end of such arrangements would still cut off a highly lucrative revenue stream. Google paid Apple $20 billion to remain the default search engine on Safari in 2022, according to Apple’s December motion to intervene in the case.

“If this court prohibits Google from sharing revenue for search distribution, Apple would have two unacceptable choices,” Eddy Cue, Apple’s senior vice president of services, wrote in his declaration of support for the motion. “It could still let users in the United States choose Google as a search engine for Safari, but Apple could not receive any share of the resulting revenue, so Google would obtain valuable access to Apple’s users at no cost. Or Apple could remove Google Search as a choice on Safari. But because customers prefer Google, removing it as an option would harm both Apple and its customers.”

Mozilla may face far greater disruption. The company derives a significant portion of its annual revenue — some 85% in 2023, according to Fortune — from its exclusivity deal with Google, a dependency that could become an existential liability if the court bans such agreements outright.

Samsung, meanwhile, could have more freedom to strike its own deals if Google is forced to separate Android from its other services. But untangling those tightly linked agreements could create new headaches for phone makers used to getting everything — the operating system, the browser and the search engine — in one package.

But while the courtroom battle focuses on Google’s grip over traditional search, the future of the industry may already be slipping beyond the company’s control. The rise of artificial intelligence-powered tools like ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity is beginning to shift how users interact with information online — away from keyword-driven search results and toward conversational, context-aware answers.

“The search market is not what it was when this case started,” Hogg said. “But that also doesn’t mean that Google’s monopolistic practices aren’t problematic.”

Google, long viewed as a leader in AI research, has released a competitive model in Gemini, but is facing strong headwinds from faster-moving rivals like OpenAI and Anthropic, who continue to beat Google across several key benchmarks, according to Stanford University’s 2025 AI Index Report.

Hogg argued the company’s dominance in traditional search may have discouraged it from more aggressively pursuing its own breakthrough tools.

“They were developing what eventually became Gemini four, five, six years ago,” Hogg continued. “But instead of launching it, they kind of held off until OpenAI jumped onto the scene. The reason they weren’t investing as heavily and not willing to go to the levels outside companies were going to go is because of the clear competition to their search monopoly.”

Under the Biden administration, the DOJ initially proposed in November that Google divest its AI investments, including stakes in companies like Anthropic, to prevent further entrenchment of its search monopoly. As of March, however, the Trump administration’s DOJ is now only requiring Google to give advance notice of future AI investments — a shift toward a more hands-off approach under President Donald Trump, though concerns still remain.

“We believe that Google can and will attempt to circumvent the court’s remedies if [AI provisions are] not included,” DOJ prosecutor David Dahlquist told Mehta in court Monday, according to Fortune. “Gen AI is Google’s next evolution to keep their vicious cycle spinning.” A written transcript of proceedings has not yet been publicly released.

Still, the central question is whether any remedy — no matter how well-crafted — can land quickly or forcefully enough to matter in a search market already being reshaped, or replaced, by AI. Hogg such remedies can, but only if paired with real competitive pressure.

“It’s going to end up being this confluence of remedies against Google plus innovation in the market,” Hogg said. “Maybe we’ll see in five, six, seven years that Google Search will kind of be like Yahoo — everybody remembers it was that huge thing, but now everybody’s using Perplexity or whatever.”

The case also comes at a politically volatile moment for Big Tech. Originally filed under Trump, the lawsuit moved forward under former President Joe Biden and has now re-escalated under Trump’s second term. Key regulatory appointees — including Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chairman Andrew Ferguson, a longtime skeptic of Silicon Valley consolidation — have signaled a more aggressive stance toward digital monopolies, even as the administration’s DOJ softens some of its earlier demands.

Just last week, Google was dealt another blow when a federal judge ruled it had illegally used its dominance in digital advertising to edge out competitors — a separate case with implications that could lead to further structural remedies. Meta, too, remains locked in an antitrust battle with the FTC over its acquisition of Instagram and WhatsApp, underscoring that Google’s trial is just one front in a much larger war.

However Mehta rules in the coming months, the outcome will demonstrate how far the government is willing, and able, to go in challenging the foundations of Silicon Valley’s power.

AUTHOR

Thomas English

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Clinton-Appointed Judge Deals Crushing Antitrust Blow To Google’s Ad Empire

There’s A ‘Deeply Dangerous’ Arms Race Emerging On Global Stage

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Declassified Document Reveals Biden’s Scheme To Spy On Americans

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

The full extent of former President Joe Biden’s apparent lawfare seems to be coming to light.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard declassified the Biden Administration’s “Strategic Implementation Plan For Countering Domestic Terrorism” on April 16. The fifteen-page document details “four pillars” of domestic terrorism response, as assessed by intelligence and law enforcement in March 2021.

How exactly did the administration plan to accomplish these lofty goals? By, it appears, increasing mass surveillance of the American people.

“Optimize and create, as appropriate, interagency federal and state level data sharing arrangements to improve real-time data and information sharing to identify individuals at risk in order to target interventions at the local, state, and federal level,” the declassified plan explains.

The administration hoped to drive “executive and legislative action, including banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.” Their goal has become law in Colorado, where Democratic Gov. Jared Polis recently approved an absurdly restrictive gun bill.

The document also references implementation of the bizarrely named “COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act,” signed into law in May 2021, as part of “improv[ing] federal hate crimes data and analysis to eliminate hate crimes under-reporting; mitigat[ing] xenophobia and bias, including by advancing inclusion in the nation’s COVID-19 response.” Are we to understand that the coronavirus was committing hate crimes against innocent pedestrians?

Perhaps most concerning are details of the administration’s attempts at ideological control.

“Norms of non-violent political expression and rejection of racism and bigotry are strengthened,” reads the document. “Americans have increasing faith in democracy and government.”

The neat gloss of “fighting racism” permits the administration enormous discretion in deciding who qualifies as a domestic problem. Democrats have bloated and contorted the definitions of “racism,” “bigotry,” and “democracy” beyond recognition in recent years — often in service of dismissing the concerns of Republican voters. A recent speech reveals just how Biden feels about Trump supporters.

“We can’t go on like this with a nation as divided as we are. It’s never been this divided. Granted, it’s roughly 30%, but it’s a 30% that has no heart,” said the former president.

Biden announced the creation of the nation’s first “National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism” in June 2021. The strategy, as explained to the public, justified itself by dual reasoning: a “resurgence” of racially motivated violence, attacks against government institutions, and associated individuals. Among the latter, according to the document, were the January 6, 2021, protests which culminated in protesters occupying the Capitol.

“Americans witnessed an unprecedented attack against a core institution of our democracy: the U.S. Congress,” the document claims.

Also unprecedented was the Biden administration’s campaign against political rivals under the guise of fighting domestic terrorism.

AUTHOR

Natalie Sandoval

Contributor. Follow Natalie Sandoval on X: @NatalieIrene03

RELATED ARTICLES:

Four Years Later, The Jan 6 ‘Never Forget’ Propaganda Has Utterly Collapsed

Blue State Bill Targeting ‘Misgendering’ Could Be Barreling Toward Free Speech Fight, Legal Experts Say

Ted Cruz, Jim Jordan Ramp Up Pressure On Google Parent Company To Deal With ‘Censorship’

EXCLUSIVE: Department of Homeland Security Confirms Abrego García Stopped On Suspicion Of Human Trafficking

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republised with permission. ©All rights reserved.

U.S. State Department Closes Censorship Office

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Big Brother is no longer watching Americans from Foggy Bottom. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Wednesday announced “the closure of the State Department’s Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference (R/FIMI), formerly known as the Global Engagement Center (GEC),” an office which “spent millions of dollars to actively silence and censor the voices of Americans they were supposed to be serving.”

The State Department censorship office had “cost taxpayers more than $50 million per year,” according to the agency. It placed all 30 full-time staff on leave, eliminated all 50 full-time positions, and notified Congress of R/FIMI’s dissolution, with total savings of $65 million annually.

“GEC was supposed to be dead already,” Rubio declared in an op-ed for The Federalist. As TWS previously reported, the legislative authority for GEC expired on December 23, 2024, after the Republican-controlled House of Representatives “declined to enact several proposals to extend the GEC’s mandate,” according to the Congressional Research Service obituary.

Instead, the Biden administration merely staged a funeral and put the censorship apparatus into hiding. “When Republicans in Congress sunset GEC’s funding at the end of last year, the Biden State Department simply slapped on a new name. The GEC became the Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference (R-FIMI) office with the same roster of employees. With this new name, they hoped to survive the transition to the new administration,” Rubio related. “Today, we are putting that to an end. Whatever name it goes by, GEC is dead. It will not return.”

President Barack Obama first “directed the Secretary of State to establish the GEC by executive Order” in March 2016 “to carry out U.S.-government-sponsored counterterrorism communications to foreign publics.” Congress later expanded that mission to include “counter[ing] foreign state and non-state propaganda and disinformation efforts,” as well as leading and coordinating inter-agency counter-propaganda efforts.

Progressive operatives lurking in the bureaucracy twisted this mission into a license to suppress any domestic political speech they disliked, even before the Biden administration made it official policy. Rather than censor Americans’ speech directly, which would raise obvious First Amendment concerns, GEC and other federal agencies “effectively outsourced to the newly emerging censorship-industrial complex” to private proxies, according to a report published by the U.S. House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government — as if that made the First Amendment problems go away.

Through a so-called Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), the GEC collaborated with private institutions to “monitor and censor Americans’ online speech in advance of the 2020 presidential election,” the report continued.

“Twitter, Facebook, Google, and other companies developed a formal system for taking in moderation requests from every corner of government, from the FBI, the DHS, the HHS, DOD, the Global Engagement Center at State, even the CIA,” testified journalist Matt Taibbi, after reporting on the Twitter files. “For every government agency scanning Twitter, there were perhaps 20 quasi-private entities doing the same thing, including Stanford’s Election Integrity Partnership, NewsGuard, the Global Disinformation Index, and many others — many taxpayer-funded.”

In fact, the GEC was responsible for much of that taxpayer funding, a U.S. House Committee on Small Business (HCSB) report found, providing start-up capital through a murky sub-award to NewsGuard, an American tech company that rates the trustworthiness of news outlets with a manifestly leftward bias. The HCSB report concluded that the GEC had “circumvented its strict international mandate by funding, developing, then promoting tech start-ups and other small businesses in the disinformation detection space to private sector entities with domestic censorship capabilities.”

But the GEC had problems beyond its ravenous appetite to censor domestic speech. A 2022 inspection by the State Department Office of the Inspector General (OIG) faulted the GEC for a poor internal structure, conflict with other units within the State Department, and competition with “counter-disinformation efforts housed in other government agencies” that did a better job of executing what should have been its main mission: countering propaganda from hostile foreign actors.

The problems with the GEC weren’t going to disappear simply by changing the office’s name. “Over the last decade, Americans have been slandered, fired, charged, and even jailed for simply voicing their opinions,” wrote Rubio. “That ends today.” Thus, for the second time in four months, the State Department has declared an end to its office engaging in domestic censorship. This time, it seems that the GEC is dead for good.

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Why Senator Rick Scott Shut Down Our Christian Film About the LGBT Agenda

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

When even Republican senators are too afraid to host a Christian film, it’s not just a cancellation—it’s a crisis of courage. 

We expected backlash. We expected protests. We even expected the mainstream media to attack our film.

But what we didn’t expect—and what shocked us to the core—was being canceled by one of our own, a move that left us all in disbelief.

This June, our Christian Action Network was scheduled to premiere our new documentary, Stolen Rainbow, in the Senate Hart Office Building. We had submitted the request, received a positive response from Senator Rick Scott’s office, and were preparing to launch the film just steps from the U.S. Capitol.

Then—without warning—Senator Rick Scott pulled the plug.

Let me be clear: this wasn’t a misunderstanding, this wasn’t a double booking, and it certainly wasn’t because of a lack of space.

Here’s what we received from Elli Dalton, Sen. Scott’s scheduler, on March 14 in response to our room request:

“Thank you for sending this request. I will work on this and circle back with any availability!”

Though not using the word “approved,” that response is effectively a green light. Anyone familiar with Senate building operations knows that finding a room for a June event with that much notice is not an issue. After that message, we began preparing for the screening.

But three weeks passed. No updates. No room number. No response.

So, we followed up. And that’s when the door slammed shut.

On April 3, we received this:

“I’m so sorry, we do not expect to be able to accommodate this room request. We will let you know if anything changes but I suggest reaching out to a different office. I apologize for the inconvenience.”

No explanation. No clarification. And most telling of all: no mention of room unavailability.

We replied graciously, even offering flexibility in the timing—any day, any month.

But we never heard back. We were ghosted like a 16-year-old girl on prom night.

This was not a scheduling issue.

This was a decision—and a deliberate one. A decision that could have been communicated weeks earlier.

Instead, they left us rotting like an overripe banana and then had the audacity to suggest we “reach out to a different office,” something they could easily have told us back in March, giving us more time to reach “a different office.”

So What Happened?

Let me be blunt: Stolen Rainbow isn’t “hateful,” “homophobic,” or “extremist.” It’s a factual, hard-hitting documentary that exposes how the LGBT movement hijacked the rainbow, rewrote history, and pushed a radical agenda that’s targeting America’s children under the false flag of love and inclusion.

It’s bold—but it’s the truth.

And apparently, the truth is now too dangerous for the U.S. Senate.

It’s packed with facts, testimony, and courage—exactly the kind of message that will panic both activist groups and (apparently) Republican senators.

It’s no stretch to believe that political pressure—perhaps even from within his own office—pushed Senator Scott to revoke our reservation. But instead of standing strong, he chose silence, safety, and walking away from the fight.

And by doing so, he handed the radical left exactly what they wanted: a Christian voice silenced on Capitol Hill.

The GOP’s Culture War Retreat?

Senator Scott’s actions raise a bigger question: What’s happening to the conservative movement?

When even Republican senators refuse to host a film exposing the LGBT agenda—when they quietly step back rather than stand up—who’s left to defend truth?

The message to Christians is loud and clear: Don’t count on Capitol Hill.

If the Senate Won’t Hear It, We’ll Take It to the People

We’re not quitting. If Senator Scott won’t host Stolen Rainbow, then we’ll find a venue that will. A different Member of Congress. A theater. A church. A public square.

We will show this film.

Because if the rainbow has been stolen, we’re going to take it back—one heart, one screen, one stand at a time.

But we can’t do it alone. We need your help to make this happen.

Help Us Stand Where Others Backed Down

We’re working now to reschedule the premiere—possibly at a nearby venue in Washington, D.C.—and to launch a bold nationwide campaign to ensure this film reaches families, pastors, and educators across America.

If you’re tired of Christian voices being silenced—even by so-called conservatives—then stand with us. We’re not giving up. We’re taking Stolen Rainbow directly to the people.

But we need your help to do it.

Click the donate button below to help us reschedule the premiere, launch a national campaign, and make sure this film is seen—loudly and unapologetically—across America.

Because if we don’t speak up now… who will?

AUTHOR

Martin Mawyer

Martin Mawyer is president of the Christian Action Network, which he founded in 1990. Located in Lynchburg, VA, CAN was formed as a non-profit educational organization to protect America’s religious and moral heritage. He is the author of several books, including You Are Chosen: Prepare to Triumph in a Fallen World.

©2025 . All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump’s Press Team Won’t Respond to Emails with ‘Preferred Pronouns’ in Signature

EXCLUSIVE: University Of Kentucky Offers To Violate State Law To Trans Kids — Changes Tune When Reporter Notices

Kansas Governor Vetoes Bill to Protect Prospective Foster Families from Religious Discrimination

Please visit the Majority Report substack.

PODCAST: From J6 Political Prisoner to Senator? Nine out of ten new jobs went to immigrants since 2020

/in , , , , , , , , /by

GUESTS AND TOPICS

ERIC RUARK

Eric Ruark is the Director of Research for NumbersUSA and has worked on immigration policy since 2008. Eric has researched and published extensively on U.S. immigration policy, and his work has been cited in national and international media reports. He testified before the Senate on agricultural guest worker programs in 2011.

TOPIC: Nine out of ten new jobs went to immigrants since 2020

JAKE LANG

Jake Lang is one of the most high profile January 6 defendants to be pardoned by Donald J. Trump in January of 2025. He had spent over 4 years in the Washington D.C. gulag, without ever having a trial. He had also been subjected to over 900 days in solitary confinement, often in brutal conditions. He is part of a group of former political prisoners that is filing a massive lawsuit against the federal government. Jake Lang, a pardoned January 6 political prisoner, shares his transformative journey through 2 years of solitary confinement, revealing a story of resilience, faith, and unexpected spiritual growth.

TOPIC: From J6 Political Prisoner to Senator?

©2025 . All rights reserved.

FRANCE: Deep State Strikes Again, Taking Out Prime-Time Conservative Leader Who was Poised to Win Election in 2027

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Marine Le Pen has been convicted and sentenced to four years by corrupt French court system. 

We have huge breaking news out of France today.

Marine Le Pen was banned from seeking public office for five years, a French court ruled after the right-wing leader was found guilty of embezzlement by a criminal court.

The news means Le Pen, the current frontrunner in the 2027 presidential election, cannot run unless she successfully appeals.

According to the New York Times, Le Pen has denied any wrongdoing in the case, which involved accusations that her party, the National Rally, illegally used several million euros in European Parliament funds for expenses between 2004 and 2016.

The court also sentenced Le Pen, 56, to four years in prison, with two of those years suspended. The court said the other two of those years could be served under a form of house arrest. She was fined 100,000 euros, or about $108,000.

Le Pen’s electoral ineligibility is effective immediately. As a result, only a successful appeal before the 2027 deadline to enter the race would allow her to run.

That is not impossible, but it will be extremely difficult, according to the Times’ article, which stated:

“The appeals process is slow in France, and even if a new trial took place before the election, it is unclear whether the prosecution’s case would be overturned.” (The New York Times)

Le Pen had emerged as the frontrunner in France’s 2027 presidential race at a time when France’s current globalist leader, President Emannuel Macron, is wildly unpopular. Macron rants and raves constantly about Russia and how he wants to send French boys to die fighting Ukraine’s border war with Putin.

This is the new face of “democracy” in the West. Send your anti-globalist opposition to prison when you can’t defeat them at the polls. Watch them ban and criminalize her party next. Perhaps some of her biggest supporters will also be locked up.

The deep state will also slaughter you in the media if you are an anti-globalist politician. Look how even some conservative American news sites describe La Pen as “far right.” Liberal ones go even farther with the narrative that she is a “danger to democracy.”

Today’s breaking news out of France affirms what I’ve always said, that the deep state is not relegated to Washington. It runs through Ottawa, London and Paris as well.

Look how Canada just celebrated getting rid of WEF puppet Justin Trudeau, only to wake up one morning and find out he’d been replaced by an even darker globalist monster, the international banker and WEF puppet Mark Carney.

The deep state is a global leviathan that cannot be defeated by anyone but Jesus Christ. This deep state is now in the process of rushing the world to war on a massive scale. Any politician who stands in the way will be crushed.

And this deep state, which drives the beast system, will reign supreme for a brief period until Christ Himself intervenes to crush it.

©2025 . All rights reserved.

Leo’s Newsletter is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

EXCLUSIVE: Researchers Axed Data Point Undermining ‘Narrative’ That White Doctors Are Biased Against Black Babies

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

A researcher who argued that infant mortality is higher for black newborns with white doctors because of racial bias omitted a variable from the paper that “undermines the narrative,” according to the researcher’s internal notes.

The study forms a keystone of the racial concordance field, which hypothesizes patients are better served by medical providers of the same race, and has served as a rationale for affirmative action. It faces new questions just as universities move to defund their Diversity, Equity and Inclusion programs or face legal action.

The August 2020 study in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) concluded that the gap in mortality rates between black newborns and white newborns declines by 58% if the black newborns are under the care of black physicians. A possible driver of the phenomenon could include a “spontaneous bias” by white physicians toward the babies, the researchers wrote.

The paper’s most high-profile booster was Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who cited it as evidence for the benefits of affirmative action in her dissent in the 2023 Supreme Court ruling Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which found that universities that considered the race of college applicants had violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

“For high-risk Black newborns, having a Black physician is tantamount to a miracle drug: it more than doubles the likelihood that the baby will live,” reads an amicus brief filed by the Association of American Medical Colleges. “Yet due to the enduring and significant underrepresentation of minorities in the health professions, many minority patients will not receive care from a racially diverse team or from providers who were trained in a diverse environment.”

Black newborn babies in the US are more likely to survive childbirth if they are cared for by Black doctors, but three times more likely to die when looked after by White doctors, a study finds. https://t.co/cwZ3BZmlL2

— CNN (@CNN) August 18, 2020

But the study’s methods have been called into question. A September 2024 replication effort concluded that the original study authors did not statistically control for very low birth weight newborns at the highest risk of dying. Applying that control zeroed out any statistically significant effect of racial concordance on infant mortality.

Now, evidence has emerged that the paper’s lead author buried information in order to tell a tidier story than the one his methods and data originally illustrated.

A key data point was edited out of the body of the paper, apparently because it muddled the downstream policy implications of the study, according to documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act by the nonprofit Do No Harm, which opposes identity politics in medical research and clinical practice.

The study originally asserted that white babies died less frequently with white doctors.

“White newborns experience 80 deaths per 100,000 births more with a black physician than a white physician, implying a 22% fatality reduction from racial concordance,” an unpublished draft reads.

But the study’s lead author Brad N. Greenwood wrote in the margin: “I’d rather not focus on this. If we’re telling the story from the perspective of saving black infants this undermines the narrative.”

“That’s not how scientists speak,” Ian Kingsbury, director of research at Do No Harm, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “It’s not a smoking gun, but it’s certainly suggestive they were pushing one narrative or another.”

The data point was axed.

“Concordance appears to bring little benefit for White newborns,” the paper reads.

While omitted in the paper’s body, the data point can be found in the appendix as part of a logistic model. Unlike the linear regression highlighted in the paper, a logistic model is more appropriate for binary questions like whether a newborn survives or dies, according to Ted Frank, a senior attorney with the Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute, which filed an amicus brief in favor of Students for Fair Admissions.

Greenwood, the Maximus Corporate Partner Professor of Business at George Mason University, wrote another note to his coauthors that may indicate he had a predetermined desired conclusion, a strong correlation between physician race and clinical outcomes, the FOIA documents suggest. Greenwood wrote in a February 2019 email that the correlation between variables had decreased after a coding fix, which he described as “bad news.”

“Good news – I caught my obligatory coding error, updated results are attached. Bad news- results are not as strong. We lose the effect when a physician fixed effect is included for newborns,” Greenwood said in an email to his coauthors on February 16, 2019. “I think there is enough to tell a story here.”

Greenwood did not reply to a request for comment. Publisher PNAS also did not respond to a request for comment.

Kingsbury said that because of the study’s apparent methodological flaws he doubts the paper’s claims on both the purported benefits of racial concordance for both white newborns and black newborns.

“Not only is this offensive to the doctors who don’t care at all what color their patients are but it’s self-defeating,” Kingsbury said. “You want the highest quality of care from the highest quality of candidates who get into and go through medical school.”

The study has been cited 507 times in the scientific literature. But the study has made a big impact outside of academia too.

Published in August 2020 amid the Black Lives Matter protests, the study has generated more public discussion in the laypress and on social media than 99% of scientific studies published in the last five years, according to Altmetric. The study has received coverage in 340 outlets including CNN, USA Today, and the Washington Post.

Time Magazine named one of the study’s coauthors, University of Minnesota Center for Antiracism Research for Health Equity Director Rachel Hardeman, as one of the country’s 100 most influential people in 2024. Prior investigations by the Daily Caller News Foundation found that the University of Minnesota questioned applicants to its medical school about George Floyd and that the medical school spent $200,000 on racial bias training.

Hardeman did not respond to a request for comment.

The PNAS paper illustrates that health equity research is often politically motivated, which is used to justify DEI policies, which are used to incentivize more of the same types of research questions, John Sailer, director of higher education policy at the Manhattan Institute, told the DCNF.

“A lot of researchers will openly declare their political agenda, espousing methodologies like public health critical race praxis. To state the obvious, it politicizes science,” he said. “It’s no surprise universities are now facing a serious reckoning.”

AUTHOR

Emily Kopp

Contributor.

RELATED ARTIVLE: EXCLUSIVE: University Spent Over $200,000 On ‘Diversity’ Course Teaching Physicians That Healthcare Is Racist

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

At the University of Chicago, Free Speech for Me, But Not for Thee

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

The pro-Hamas brownshirts at the University of Chicago noisily insist that they are only exercising its “right to free speech” when they demonstrators chant “From the river to the sea/Palestine will be free,” which, rightly understood, is a call for the destruction of Israel and its replacement by a 23rd Arab state. They are exercising their “right to free speech” when they harass Jewish students who are walking across the campus, or when they try to disrupt classes taught by “Zionist” professors. They call the arrest of Mahmoud Khalil by the government a violation of this Hamas collaborator’s “right to free speech.” But they are not about to accord the same “right to free speech” to pro-Israel groups on campus such as Maroons For Israel. More on this double standard can be found here: “Palestinian Supporters at My School Don’t Want Free Speech; They Want to Silence Jews,” by Joachim Sciamma, Algemeiner, March 26, 2025:

On March 11, 2025, University of Chicago students took to the quad, just as final exams were beginning, to oppose the arrest of Columbia University encampment organizer Mahmoud Khalil.

Khalil is accused of distributing pro-Hamas propaganda, including material labeled from the “Hamas Media Office.”  The University of Chicago student demonstrators invoked our school’s principles in defense of freedom of expression — labeling the arrest a violation of Khalil’s right to free speech.

Unfortunately, these protestors only agree with free speech when it is content they agree with….

Consider the following example: In February 2025, Israel confirmed that civilian hostages, Ariel, Kfir, and their mother, Shiri Bibas, had been murdered in Hamas captivity. Ariel was 4 years old, and his little brother was 9 months old when they were kidnapped….

Although the Bibas family’s true cause of death has been proven by forensic evidence, some of my peers at the University of Chicago still believe the terrorist propaganda that they perished at the hands of Israel.

In response to the murders, Maroons for Israel — the pro-Israel student organization on campus, of which I am the President– placed a University-approved installation on the Swift quadrangles in memory of Kfir Bibas on Monday, March 3.

By Friday, March 7, it was defaced; as far as we can tell, it was vandalized in broad daylight….

And that’s not the first time their hypocrisy has been on display. Last November, our approved banner explaining the danger of “globalize the intifada” rhetoric was dismantled and left in a dumpster.

Also, during an encampment on campus last spring, our approved installations were destroyed every evening, like clockwork, and every morning we had to rebuild them….

These students are also disrupting speaker events, and attempting to shut down opinions they disagree with. They called for the boycott of what they labelled “Zionist classes.” They invoke the principle of free speech when it suits them, but show open disdain for it otherwise….

Those anti-Israel “free speech” advocates tore down pro-Israel installations put up on the University of Chicago campus, not once, but every night. They defaced and tore pieces from posters with photographs of 4-year-old Ariel and 9-month-old Kfir Bibas, both of them murdered — strangled — by Hamas operatives. They pulled down the banner of a pro-Israel group explaining what the sinister slogan “globalize the Intifada” means, and left it in a dumpster. They want students to boycott “Zionist” classes. They want “free speech” for themselves, but wish to silence every possible expression of pro-Israel sympathies. The motto of these anti-Israel and antisemitic campus groups is the same everywhere, from Columbia to Berkeley: “Free Speech For Me, But Not For Thee.”

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

The IDF Has Hamas Operating In Survival Mode

Prof deported for jihad terror links says Mahmoud Khalil shouldn’t be deported, it’s legal to be pro-Hamas

Canada: Muslim ‘non-profit’ organization ‘campaigns to endorse candidates based on Gaza support’

Palestinian Authority pays grants to terrorists from its General Intelligence Forces

‘Overwhelming number’ of Britons back mass deportation of illegal migrants and foreign offenders

RELATED VIDEOS:

Glazov Gang: The Left – Nothing Left But Mental Illness

Columbia University grads shred diplomas in protest over school’s cooperation

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.