EXCLUSIVE: Texas Facebook Billionaire Accused Of Violating Law To Fund Liberal Causes

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

A Texas philanthropist is abusing the nonprofit legal system to quietly fund Democratic priorities such as ranked-choice voting, a conservative watchdog group claims.

John Arnold’s Action Now Initiative pretends to be a social welfare organization to enjoy tax-exempt status while spending heavily on campaigns, American Accountability Foundation (AAF) alleged in an IRS complaint obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation. In one instance, Action Now Initiative’s IRS filings seemingly failed to report hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on a 2020 ranked-choice voting campaign in Alaska, AAF told the agency Feb. 4, citing public records.

“Our organization fully complies with all applicable tax laws and reporting requirements, and any claim otherwise is false,” a spokesperson for Arnold Ventures, Arnold’s private company, told the DCNF in response to an inquiry sent to Action Now Initiative. Arnolds is also a board member at Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta, its website shows.

Arnold’s organizations promote gun control, lenient criminal justice policies and “racial justice,” though he has portrayed himself as opposed to “partisan” politicians. Sixty-one percent of Arnold Ventures’ campaign donations went to Democrats in 2024, according to the database Open Secrets. Action Now Initiative’s website declares its goal of supporting “the mission of Arnold Ventures to MAXIMIZE OPPORTUNITY AND MINIMIZE INJUSTICE through evidence-based policy reform.”

Records show “substantial evidence of failure to report state political spending by [Arnold] to influence a successful ballot initiative in Alaska and him abusing the federal tax code to do it,” AAF told the IRS.

Action Now Initiative spent around $3 million in 2019 and 2020 on Alaska’s ranked-choice voting ballot initiative while reporting just $2,500 in expenses for 2019 and $8,693 for 2020 in IRS filings, AAF noted. The discrepancies “strongly indicate violations” of tax law, according to the watchdog group.

“While [Arnold’s] ideology is not itself unlawful, the use of a § 501(c)(4) entity to channel large-scale electoral spending — particularly when paired with materially incomplete federal reporting — constitutes an abuse of the social welfare form and warrants heightened enforcement scrutiny,” AAF wrote.

The complaint asks the IRS to investigate Action Now Initiative’s financial disclosures, decide whether it is improperly acting as a political organization and impose “all appropriate enforcement actions” if needed, such as revocation of its tax-exempt status. The IRS did not respond to the DCNF’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

Hudson Crozier

DCNF Crime and Extremism Reporter

RELATED ARTICLE: EXCLUSIVE: IRS Quietly Puts On New Face, Ousts Anti-Trump Spokeswoman With Drunk Driving Record

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.

Virginia’s New Democratic Trifecta Targets Taxes, Guns, and Sentencing

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

A new wave of elected Democrats in Virginia is showing how much of a difference one election can make.

In Virginia’s 2025 midterm elections, Democrats managed to sweep the state, claiming three high-ranking political positions: governor, lieutenant governor, and attorney general. It didn’t take long for the shift in power to translate into policy action. Governor Abigail Spanberger was sworn in on January 17, 2026, and almost immediately, a flurry of new legislation emerged from the Democratic-controlled General Assembly.

Some of the early proposals included gun-related measures that critics argued targeted Second Amendment rights, such as expanded restrictions or heavy taxes on firearms and ammunition. However, scrutiny has intensified across the board as Democrats continue to push broader priorities that stir controversy and appear to diverge sharply from campaign promises.

One high-profile example is House Bill 863, sponsored by Democratic Delegate Rae Cousins. The bill seeks to eliminate mandatory minimum sentences for a range of serious crimes, including manslaughter, rape, possession and distribution of child pornography, assaulting law enforcement officers, certain repeat violent felonies, and even the mandatory five-day jail sentence for some first-time DUI offenders. According to The Post Millennial, “many left-wing activists have criticized mandatory minimum sentencing, labelling the practice as racist.”

Supporters have described it as a “common-sense proposal” that removes “one-size-fits-all” requirements. “This change would give the experienced judges in our communities more discretion to make decisions based on the unique facts of each case,” Cousins said. Proponents also argue it promotes fairer, more individualized sentencing and addresses long-standing criticisms of mandatory minimums as overly rigid or disproportionately harmful. Critics, however, are sounding the alarm.

Law enforcement advocates and former Republican Attorney General Jason Miyares, for example, warn that removing these required prison terms could lead to lighter punishments for dangerous offenders, potentially undermining accountability, endangering public safety, and increasing risks of re-offending. One expert, Josh Ederheimer of the University of Virginia’s Center for Public Safety and Justice, explained to Fox News that “from a law enforcement standpoint, I think police generally want offenders to be held accountable, and frustration among law enforcement officers grows when individuals are released quickly and subsequently re-offend — and even more so if it involved a violent felony.”

Considering how this would affect victims and their families, he added, “I think that the police and public alike have expectations that convicted criminals will be held accountable, and that full sentences should be served. Mandatory minimums assure victims — and the community — that a convicted person will serve their sentence. It is the circumstance when convicted felons are released early that victims may feel a sense of betrayal or that justice was not served. That’s the dilemma.” Notably, HB 863 is only one part of a larger Democratic push on criminal justice reform in the 2025-2026 session.

But for some Virginians, the concerns expand beyond gun rights and criminal justice. For instance, shortly after Democrats consolidated power, a separate set of tax proposals were introduced — mirroring (if not surpassing) some of California’s rates.

Only months after campaigning on affordability and vowing lower costs for families, Virginia Democrats set forth legislation that would create new higher-income tax brackets, including an increase to 8% on income over $600,000 and 10% on income over $1 million. They also added measures like a 3.8% net investment income tax on higher earners, which could lower after-tax returns on investments and discourage saving and investing. Combined, some say these could push Virginia’s top effective income tax rate to around 13.8%, which would potentially surpass California’s current top rate, the highest in the nation.

Even so, supporters frame the changes as a “Fair Share” approach, arguing that millionaires and high earners should contribute more to fund education, housing, public services, and affordability initiatives. Groups like The Commonwealth Institute, a left-wing policy group backing the tax plan, estimate such reforms could generate over $1 billion annually for these priorities. Meanwhile, critics are accusing Democrats of breaking campaign promises.

During her 2025 run, Spanberger emphasized an “Affordable Virginia Plan” to lower health care, housing, and energy costs, with pledges to deliver savings in 2026. Opponents, including House Minority Leader Terry Kilgore (R) and the Republican Party of Virginia, call the tax hikes a betrayal that could drive jobs, investment, and residents away — following what they describe as the “failed paths” of high-tax states like California and New York. National figures like Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform have labeled the timing “particularly foolish” amid competitive pressures from neighboring states lowering taxes.

Family Research Council’s Matt Carpenter, director of FRC Action, addressed the apparent shift in priorities with The Washington Stand. “When [Spanberger] was representing the people of Virginia’s 7th congressional district,” he said, “she was an informal member of the ‘mod squad’ of allegedly moderate House Democrats who wanted to work with their Republican counterparts on issues of mutual interest, like agriculture, veterans’ affairs, and fentanyl. She may have done some work on these issues with moderate Republicans, but the reality is Spanberger’s vote history in Congress shows her to be committed to the left-wing cultural revolution playbook.”

As he went on to explain, “She was a reliable vote when taxpayer funded abortion, gender transitions on minors, special rights for adults’ ‘sexual orientation and gender identity,’ and more, came up. And yet, during the 2025 election, she was adept at stepping around controversial topics like men participating in women’s sports throughout the campaign, maintaining her carefully curated moderate brand.”

These early moves, from gun laws to criminal justice to taxes, illustrate how dramatically one election cycle can reshape a state’s direction. With Democrats holding trifecta control for the first time in years, the 2026 legislative session is already advancing these and other priorities at a rapid pace. And yet, Carpenter concluded, it’s not surprising. Rather, he said, “It’s safe to assume [Spanberger] will do as governor just as she did while in Congress: campaign as a centrist and govern as a bona fide leftist.”

AUTHOR

Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 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.

Trans-Terrorist Who Killed Six at Nashville Christian School Bought Guns with Federal Grant Money

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

Increasingly, evidence suggests that federal taxpayer dollars are being funneled—through NGOs, grants, fraud, and systemic corruption—into the hands of those destroying this country.

The latest example comes from a report by the Tennessee Star, which indicates that the transgender individual who murdered six people at Covenant Christian School in Nashville in March 2023 may have purchased firearms using federal student aid money. Journal pages released this week by the Federal Bureau of Investigation show the shooter meticulously comparing firearms and recording grant payments received through FAFSA and Nossi College of Art and Design—including Pell Grant funds—alongside notes about gun purchases. The documentation appears to corroborate statements previously made by the shooter’s parents to Nashville police, with the mother bluntly stating, “It was the grant money.” The case underscores a growing and alarming pattern: taxpayer funds meant to educate and uplift are instead being misused, with no meaningful safeguards, oversight, or accountability—sometimes with deadly consequences.

Report: Transgender Who Attacked Nashville Christian School Bought Guns with Federal Grant Money

By AWR Hawkins

A report by the Tennessee Star appears to show that the transgender individual who killed six at Covenant Christian school on March 27, 2023, purchased her guns with federal grant money.

The Star points to pages from a journal the she allegedly kept during 2021.

Copies of the journal pages were released by the FBI Monday, and readers can see how the transgender shooter compared and contrasted certain aspects of various guns–including various sight configurations and accuracy.

After weighing different types of guns, the Star noted that the shooter, a woman who felt she was a man, referenced the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) and numerous payments received from Nossi College when she was attending the Nossi College of Art and Design in Nashville.

At the top of one entry, the transgender shooter wrote, “FASFA [sic] grant checks started at $2,050.86.”

Below that she noted: “$2,656.87 (x3 checks from Nossi).” The next ledger entry states, “+$530.00 (x1 check Nossi) ($3,186.87).”

The Star summarized: “[The] reference to Hale’s federal student aid, located in the writings next to her entries about guns she considered buying, appears to corroborate the claims made by her parents to Metro Nashville Police Department (MNPD) detectives in 2023, when they told law enforcement their child purchased the firearms using federal Pell Grant money.”

Speaking to the Nashville Metropolitan Police, the shooter’s mother said, “It was the grant money.”

AWR Hawkins is an award-winning Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and the writer/curator of Down Range with AWR Hawkins, a weekly newsletter focused on all things Second Amendment, also for Breitbart News. He is the political analyst for Armed American Radio and holds a PhD in Military History with a focus on the Vietnam War (brown water navy), U.S. Navy since Inception, the Civil War, and Early Modern Europe. Follow him on Instagram: @awr_hawkins. You can sign up to get Down Range at breitbart.com/downrange. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Federal Officials Launch Massive Operation in Response to Billions-Scale Minnesota Fraud

Jihad Mamdani Appoints al Qaeda Terrorist Lawyer for Top Role

DAY 4 IN IRAN: Students, Women Take to the Streets Despite Live Ammo and Crackdown

New Year’s Eve Islamic Terror Attack Thwarted in Texas

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

7-Eleven Fires an Employee for Saving Her Own Life

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

While being strangled she shoots her attacker. Then gets fired!

There is a story out of Oklahoma that tells you everything about the modern corporate mind.

It’s the story of a young mother, alone at night as a 7-Eleven manager, who gets strangled by a man trying to pawn off a fake hundred-dollar bill, which she refused to accept.

While being choked, she shoots her attacker. He lives. But she gets fired. Why? Because carrying a weapon to work violates company policy.

Her name is Stephanie Dilyard, and at twenty-five, she was the only person standing between a violent repeat offender and a cash register.

When she refused to accept the counterfeit money, the man turned violent. Not just annoyed, irritated, or hostile. But violent.

He threatened to cut off her head. He threw things at her. He shoved himself behind the counter. He grabbed her by the neck. He slammed her against a sandwich case. He tried to strangle her into unconsciousness.

She tried to call the police. She tried to run. She tried everything the safety posters tell you to try.

Then she realized something. If she kept following 7-Eleven rules, she was not going to make it home to her kids. Not for Thanksgiving. Not for Christmas. Not for graduations, weddings, grandbabies, or any of the moments parents live for.

She made a choice. Her life, or a brutal death.

She drew her own firearm, which she carried legally, and fired once. The attack stopped. Police said she acted within Oklahoma’s self-defense laws, which are designed to protect innocent people from being murdered. This was not complicated.

But then, astonishingly, her employer weighed in.

Not to offer counseling. Not to thank her for surviving. Not to name her employee of the month. Not even to say good job for stopping a dangerous man who later fled the scene and, being injured, called 911.

Instead of praising the worker, the corporation decided she had violated policy. She had carried a weapon, which is apparently more offensive to 7-Eleven than a man threatening to decapitate their employees.

This is not satire. This is real life in America.

We now live in a country where predators get empathy, and victims get pink slips. Where billion-dollar corporations expect their overnight, defenseless clerks to fight off violent criminals with whatever happens to be within reach at two in the morning. A plastic spoon, a stale donut, maybe a floor mop if you are lucky. But certainly not a tool that might actually keep you alive.

You can almost hear the executives lecturing her. You defended your life. How dare you? Think of our brand image. Think of the bad publicity of shooting a “customer.”

Her coworkers openly discuss the dangerous working conditions online.

If something terrible happens, you are supposed to grab the nearest object and hope it scares away a man who just said he will cut off your head. The company even bans mace and pepper spray.

Imagine working alone through the night, surrounded by strangers, knowing you are not allowed to possess the same protections a jogger carries on a walking trail.

Meanwhile, the man who allegedly strangled her has been charged with assault, battery, threats of violence, attempted fraud, and a parole violation.

Stephanie summed it up perfectly. She said she was put in a corner. Between her life and her job. And she chose her life, because her children depend on her. She wanted to go home.

That used to be something American companies respected. Now, you get fired for it.

This story should force a serious question.

How many more people have to be assaulted, injured, or killed while corporations issue memos about brand guidelines? How many mothers need to risk their lives because someone in a distant office thinks a gun in the hands of a law-abiding woman is more dangerous than a violent criminal threatening to sever her head?

Stephanie says she hopes other women see her example and remember their right to defend themselves. She is correct. She did the right thing. She acted with courage. She chose her family.

If only her employer had the common sense to know that bad publicity is not an employee shooting an attacker who is strangling her and threatening to behead an employee.

Bad publicity is when a customer walks into 7-Eleven and sees a decapitated clerk lying behind the hot dog counter with only a plastic fork in her hand.

AUTHOR

Martin Mawyer

Martin Mawyer is the President of Christian Action Network, host of the “Shout Out Patriots” podcast, and author of When Evil Stops Hiding. Subscribe for more action alerts, cultural commentary, and real-world campaigns defending faith, family, and freedom.

©2025 All rights reserved.

Please visit the Patriot Majority Report substack.

Paid subscribers to Patriot Majority Report unlock access to every category of our work: Front Lines. Culture. Screened. Prophecy & AI. The Ledger. Films. and more. So, check back weekly for updates.

DOJ Officials Brainstorming Ways to Restrict Access to Firearms for Trans-Identifying People

/in , , , , /by

Officials inside the U.S. Department of Justice have convened several internal meetings about how to limit access to firearms for people who identify as transgender, according to multiple sources. But any policy formulated from these meetings would raise multiple concerns.

The meetings, first reported by the Daily Wire, have now been confirmed by more than half a dozen news outlets across the political spectrum. “Individuals within the DOJ are reviewing ways to ensure that mentally ill individuals suffering from gender dysphoria are unable to obtain firearms while they are unstable and unwell,” a DOJ spokesperson confirmed to Fox News, but “no specific criminal justice proposals have been advanced at this time.”

The meetings follow a mass shooting by a transgender-identified man at Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis. That tragedy adds to a string of high-profile mass shootings by mentally troubled, transgender-identifying people. Mass shootings by transgender-identified perpetrators are infrequent but disproportionately high.

Current federal law does not prevent all people with a mental illness from owning a firearm. However, the current Firearms Transaction Record (ATF Form 4473) does ask prospective gun purchasers, “Have you ever been adjudicated as a mental defective OR have you ever been committed to a mental institution?”

For some DOJ officials, the move is instinctual. “Democrats have called for common sense gun laws for a long time,” one DOJ source blabbed. “This seems pretty common sense to me.” Some righ-twing activists have also encouraged the move. Last week, Charlie Kirk posted on X, “If you are crazy enough to want to hormonally and surgically ‘change your sex,’ you have a mental disorder, and you are too crazy to own a firearm.”

Naturally, the news has drawn criticism too. “This precedent being used against trans people could be used against veterans with PTSD. It’s a slippery slope to make anyone lose their 2nd amendment rights,” complained Alejandra Caraballo, a prominent trans activist with a post at Harvard Law School. Human Rights Campaign Communications Director Laurel Powell made a similar point, “The Constitution isn’t a privilege reserved for the few; it guarantees basic rights to all. Transgender people … deserve the full protection of our nation’s laws, not anti-American nonsense from the White House.”

DOJ officials should beware playing into the narrative of transgender activists. By noodling a way to deprive people who identify as transgender — and only them — of the ability to keep firearms, the Justice Department leaves itself open to charges of discrimination. Not every transgender-identified person is a potential mass shooter, and activist lawyers would quickly enlist a sympathetic case. Activist lawyers may cite even these preliminary discussions as evidence of discriminatory intent in unrelated cases.

A second concern is the constitutional issues at play. Far more than other cultural flashpoints, firearms possession is explicitly protected under the Second Amendment to the Constitution. Left-wing lawyers could easily argue that any policy preventing transgender-identifying Americans from owning firearms violates this constitutional right, not to mention the equal protection under the law guaranteed by the 14th Amendment.

Third, even if the DOJ set aside the merits of the inevitable legal challenges that would result, it is questionable whether any policy designed to keep transgender-identified people from possessing firearms would even accomplish its intended effect — namely, to prevent mass shootings, particularly school shootings. The argument here is identical to the argument against all gun control. Somehow, criminals who want to have guns still manage to get guns, even if they have to do it illegally. After all, if they plan to kill people, why would they care about breaking a law to obtain a deadly weapon?

The fourth problem is arguably the thorniest for any policy the DOJ might devise: how would the class of affected individuals be defined? The category is nebulous, with some people identifying as transgender (or “gender-diverse”) yet making minimal efforts to modify their body, dress, or behavior. The category can also be unstable with some people changing their gender identity based on how they feel on a given day. Thus, it’s difficult to precisely define the class at all — either for activist lawyers seeking to win judicial protections, or activist executive officials seeking to impose exclusionary policies.

It’s likely that some participants in the DOJ meetings wisely recognized at least some of these same concerns. On nearly every issue, the second Trump administration has acted rapidly, even to a fault. Yet here, after several meetings, the DOJ only states that “no specific criminal justice proposals have been advanced at this time.”

Time will tell whether it stays that way. But for now, it seems like a prudent choice for the DOJ to hold meetings on the topic before rushing out an ill-conceived policy. “Where there is no guidance, a people falls, but in an abundance of counselors there is safety (Proverbs 11:14).

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: A History of Trans Mass Murderers

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.

Stop the VA’s Assault on the Second Amendment — Support HR 1041

/in , , , , , , , /by

Fellow Veterans — did you know that the VA has stripped the rights to possess firearms from over 250,000 veterans by reporting them to the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS)?

Because of this totally wrong VA determination process without any judicial hearing or due process and related loss of 2nd Amendment rights, some veterans refuse to use VA health care for fear of inadvertently making a disqualifying statement or disclosing a disabling condition.

There is now a Bill in the House, HR 1041 the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act to end the VA’s arbitrary and unconstitutional practice of automatically sending veteran’s names to NICS simply because they might need a fiduciary to assist them in managing their finances. In other words they ae presumed guilty of being a danger to themselves or others and stripped of their 2A rights (similar to unconstitutional Red Flag Laws and their Risk Protection Orders with out Due Process which 18 states have in affect).

So far HR 1041 has 50 co-sponsors to this bill submitted by Mike Bost (R-Ill), a USMC veteran. Senator John Kennedy (R-LA) is championing the cause in the house. See here.

Please call your Representative and Senators and tell them to support/vote for HR 1041. You can contact them by calling the Congressional Swithchboard and asking for thier offices as per below.

TAKE ACTION: Call Congressional Switchboard at (202) 224-3121) — ask operator to connect you to their office. Leave message with Staffer or answering machine if a Staffer doesn’t answer!

Veterans Affairs strips 250000 veterans of gun rights without due process or medical evidence

The Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs held an oversight hearing on January 14, 2025, focusing on the Department of Veterans Affairs’ (VA) practices regarding veterans’ rights, particularly concerning firearm ownership. The meeting highlighted significant concerns about the VA’s process for reporting veterans to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).

A key point of discussion was the VA’s policy of reporting veterans who require fiduciaries to manage their finances due to disabilities. It was noted that this practice has led to over 250,000 veterans being stripped of their constitutional right to possess and purchase firearms without any due process. Critics argued that these veterans, who have served to protect the Constitution, are being denied their Second Amendment rights without sufficient justification.

The subcommittee emphasized that the VA reports these veterans to the NICS list without any judicial ruling or medical evidence indicating that they pose a danger to themselves or others. There was a strong assertion that the current system lacks necessary safeguards, as no medical professional is required to assess a veteran’s risk before they are reported. This raises concerns about the fairness and legality of the VA’s actions, as there is no data supporting the notion that a veteran’s inability to manage finances due to a disability correlates with being dangerous.

The hearing underscored the need for a review of the VA’s practices to ensure that veterans’ rights are protected while also addressing any legitimate concerns about safety. The subcommittee’s discussions may lead to further investigations and potential reforms in how the VA handles these sensitive issues.

Converted from Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs Oversight Hearing meeting on January 23, 2025.

Link to Full Meeting

©2025 . All rights reserved.

VIDEO: How to Turn Your Home Into a Fortress in 30 Minutes or Less

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

Transform your home into a fortress in just 30 minutes with powerful diy home security upgrades and prepper-approved defense strategies. This video is packed with high-impact survival tips for anyone prepping for shtf, civil unrest, or just wanting to boost affordable home security fast. Whether you’re a seasoned prepper or just getting started, you’ll learn how to burglar proof your home using budget-friendly tools from your local hardware store—all while reinforcing your home defense plan and building true crisis readiness.

We reveal five critical vulnerabilities that criminals exploit to break in—and show you how to fix them fast. From reinforcing doors and adding window security film, to setting up smart home security and motion sensor lights, this guide walks you through practical, real-world solutions. You’ll also learn how to build psychological barriers that make your home a hard target, even on a budget.

This isn’t just about gear—it’s about mindset. The prepping for survival mentality means understanding the importance of layered defense, bug in security, and staying ahead of threats before they reach your door. We’ll also cover common security mistakes, emergency protocols, and how to maintain strong home security during shtf scenarios or when you’re away on vacation.

Whether you’re new to prepping or a seasoned prepper, this video from Reliable Prepper will give you the crisis readiness and tactical preparedness knowledge you need to feel confident in your home defense. Perfect for anyone focused on civil unrest safety, affordable home security, or prepping for shtf events.

Don’t wait until you’re a victim—take action now. Like, comment, and share this video with anyone who cares about protecting their home and family. And if you’re part of the prepping community, make sure to subscribe for more survival tips and reliable prepping strategies you can actually use.

WATCH: How to Turn Your Home Into a Fortress in 30 Minutes or Less

©2025 . All rights reserved.

Gun Owners Can Be Arrested For Concealed Carrying After Crossing State Lines — But There’s A Solution

/in , , , , , , , /by

While Americans acquire training to apply for concealed carry permits, Second Amendment groups are pushing Congress to pass concealed carry reciprocity legislation so gun owners are not arrested after crossing state lines.

The Daily Caller went to the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) gun range in Fairfax, Virginia, and attended Live Fire Instruction’s pistol fundamentals course in May.

Participants who complete the class are eligible to apply for a Virginia Concealed Carry Weapon (CCW) permit.

“We were so busy during COVID, we were booked months and months out,” Lisa Paris, founder and owner of Live Fire Instruction, told the Caller. “I probably could have taught a class every single day during COVID, because the level of fear was so high.”

Gun ownership, especially among women, spiked during COVID-19.

Women comprised 71 percent of first-time gun buyers from 2021 to 2024, according to a 2024 report by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF).

Women “woke up” during the pandemic, Paris said.

“I think a lot of people were like, ‘the government, they’re not going to protect me. I’m going to have to do this myself.’ And a lot of women did that,” she added.

The summer of 2020 was embroiled in protests and riots after George Floyd’s death, prompting many Americans to purchase firearms for self-defense.

Gun purchases skyrocketed that year, and the majority of buyers were women, according to Harvard data.

“Over the past five years, a growing number of Americans became first-time gun owners, particularly women, motivated by the desire to protect themselves and their families,” Josh Savani, executive director of NRA General Operations, said in a statement to the Caller.

The majority of U.S. gun owners cited “protection” as the primary reason for having a firearm, according to a 2023 Pew Research study.

However, Americans can face legal troubles while concealed carrying, even with a government-issued permit.

Republicans in Congress are pushing for concealed carry reciprocity with the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act.

The bill, introduced by Republican North Carolina Rep. Richard Hudson, would enable individuals to concealed carry across state lines. The legislation would allow an individual with a valid government permit to carry in another state, providing that state also recognizes concealed carry.

It was introduced in January 2025 and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

In Virginia, individuals must take a “competency class” to obtain a concealed carry license, according to Paris.

“Other states are way more demanding, and then you have other states that are nothing. So, Virginia is kind of in the middle of you have to do something, but it’s not extreme, right?” she told the Caller.

Virginia is a “shall-issue” state, and residents must file permit applications with their county circuit court, according to the United States Concealed Carry Association (USCCA). Residents need to complete a state-approved course.

Other states have stricter requirements.

New York requires applicants take a safety training course, present four character references, disclose who lives with them and be interviewed by a licensing officer.

West Virginia, a constitutional carry state, has no permit requirement.

Hudson’s legislation would ensure that law-abiding Americans can exercise their constitutional rights in states that allow concealed carry, Executive Director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) John Commerford told the Caller.

“If you freely travel … today, you will go through states that don’t require a permit,” he said. “You’ll go through states that require a permit but have reciprocity with your current state permit. And then you’ll cross the state line, and you’ll automatically become a felon for conduct that was lawful a mile behind you, but now you cross into New Jersey or New York or Massachusetts, and your right to self-defense went out the window.”

Police have arrested gun owners for concealed carrying in states that did not issue their permit.

Lloyd Muldrow, a Marine Corps veteran, had a concealed carry permit in Virginia. Muldrow claimed he “disarmed a man who was threatening people” in a pub in Baltimore, Maryland. He was arrested because his permit was not considered valid in Maryland.

Muldrow is not the only person to have fallen prey to concealed carry regulations, either.

Commerford pointed to the case of Shaneen Allen. She was pulled over in New Jersey and later arrested for carrying a handgun with a Pennsylvania concealed carry permit, NBC 10 reported in 2017.

She could have faced years in prison, but Allen was ultimately pardoned by then-Republican New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.

“[The] Second Amendment doesn’t discriminate on zip code,” Commerford emphasized.

There are various ways for new gun owners to learn the fundamentals of firearms so they can acquire a concealed carry license if their state of residency requires one.

Paris said the two most signicant takeaways for participants in her class are safety and enjoyment.

“Probably the biggest thing from this particular class is safety. You’re not hurting yourself, and you’re not hurting anybody else,” she said. “And then enjoy the sport. Once you love the sport, you’ll come to the gun range and shoot for fun. And then you’ll also be a responsible gun owner, because you’re practicing the sport.”

The NRA provides several firearms training classes, including courses for women.

“As the nation’s leader in firearms safety and training, the NRA is a trusted resource for new gun owners from all walks of life who are seeking top-tier instruction and education,” Savani said in a statement to the Caller.

“With a nationwide network of over 100,000 certified instructors, NRA courses equip gun owners with the skills and confidence to safely handle, store, and maintain their firearms. We’re especially proud to offer programs tailored specifically for women, including our Women on Target® Instructional Shooting Clinics, as well as specialized self-defense and concealed carry training,” he continued. “The NRA is committed to empowering all law-abiding Americans to exercise their Second Amendment freedoms and the right to self-defense.”

Hudson’s bill is not the only legislation making its way through Congress that could dramatically impact gun rights.

The House of Representatives passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act in May, including Section 2 of the Hearing Protection Act. That provision would remove suppressors from the National Firearms Act (NFA).

If the legislation is implemented, it would “be the biggest win for gun owners in my generation,” Commerford told the Caller.

The NFA mandates that suppressors (otherwise known as “silencers”) be registered with the federal government, according to the NRA. The Hearing Protection Act would also remove the $200 tax, and buyers would be subject to a background check instead of an “onerous federal transfer process,” according to the NRA Hunters’ Leadership Forum.

The NFA falls under the Bureau for Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), and the Trump admin is taking steps to make the agency less hostile to gun owners.

The ATF updated its national policy on federal firearm licensee inspections in May, replacing the Biden administration’s “zero-tolerance” policy.

The ATF previously announced that the bureau, along with the DOJ, will be reviewing two other Biden-era firearms policies.

AUTHOR

Eireann Van Natta

Associate Editor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

EXCLUSIVE: Second Amendment Groups Urge Congressional Republicans To Kill Decades-Old Suppressor Tax

Army Secretary Reportedly Takes Reins From Kash Patel At ATF

One Forgotten Government Agency Has Tormented Americans For Years — Kash Patel Could Fix It

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

DERELICTION OF DUTY: Chief Justice John Roberts Admits It’s His Job to Rein in the Judicial Insurrection—and He’s Not Doing It

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

The deep state and its allies have launched a judicial insurrection against President Donald Trump, and Chief Justice John Roberts effectively just admitted he’s not doing his job to stop it.

Roberts made a rare public statement back in March, criticizing Trump and other Republicans who have suggested impeaching judges to prevent them from taking it upon themselves to make national policy through injunctions. Yet Roberts refused to address the underlying issue, and he dodged again in public remarks Wednesday.

“What do you think of these calls for impeachment of judges based on the decisions that they’ve made?” Judge Lawrence Vilardo asked Roberts in an interview in Buffalo, New York.

“Impeachment is not how you register disagreement with decisions,” the chief justice said, repeating the substance of his comments in March.

“That’s what you’re there for,” Vilardo responded.

“That’s what we’re there for,” Roberts agreed.

Again, Roberts overlooked the underlying issue. Republicans aren’t calling for the impeachment of justices because they disagree with one particular decision—they’re exasperated because judge after judge after judge is effectively usurping the president’s authority by issuing so many nationwide injunctions.

The Judicial Insurrection

When woke bureaucrats stared down the barrel of a second Trump term, they strategized about how best to tie the new president’s hands. Public-sector unions made new collective bargaining agreements to protect work-from-home perks. Employees changed their titles to hide “diversity, equity, and inclusion.” Perhaps most importantly, bureaucrats and their allies outside the administration geared up to sue the Trump administration, targeting friendly judges.

Sure enough, the ink was barely dry on the president’s executive orders rooting woke ideology out of the government before public-sector unions (which represent federal bureaucrats) and leftist groups had taken the new administration to court. Many of these groups also hand-picked jurisdictions with judges more likely to give them the injunctions they seek.

According to the Congressional Research Service, judges issued 86 nationwide injunctions against President Trump in his first administration, with 36 of them involving immigration and 10 involving federal funding related to immigration. By contrast, judges issued only 28 nationwide injunctions against Biden. Between Jan. 20 and March 27 of this year, judges issued 17 injunctions—more than half of the number in Biden’s entire term.

Many of the unions and leftist groups filing these lawsuits also staffed and advised the Biden administration, as I expose in my book, “The Woketopus: The Dark Money Cabal Manipulating the Federal Government.” The ACLU, for instance, pushed the Biden administration to open the border, and now the ACLU is filing lawsuits to block Trump’s border policies.

The judges—many of them appointed by Democrats, surprise surprise!—have taken the opportunity to issue “nationwide injunctions.” While temporary injunctions allow a judge to protect one of the parties in a case from harm while the court considers the case, judges have weaponized this power, claiming to protect people across the country who aren’t parties to the suit.

This practice of “judge shopping” enables activist groups to succeed in early stages of litigation before ultimately failing when the case reaches the Supreme Court. This gives judges a chance to carry out a judicial insurrection. It also gives the case the appearance of success, motivating the leftist groups and their supporters, while tying up the government in the meantime—all in pursuit of a vain claim.

The Supreme Court Acts

For instance, judges blocked Trump’s order removing gender ideology from the military and ordered the government to re-hire probationary employees after they had been fired.

The Supreme Court rightly struck down these injunctions, but the judges only handled them on a case-by-case basis.

Judges have blocked the State Department’s move to restructure the U.S. Agency for International Development, ordered the administration to halt its freeze on federal spending, demanded the government restore deleted websites, and more.

This deluge of injunctions calls for a robust response from the nation’s highest court—or, at the very least, direction from the man who heads the entire U.S. judicial system, Chief Justice Roberts.

Trump, Congress Consider Other Solutions

Roberts only got involved after Trump expressed exasperation over the injunctions.

Trump has pledged to comply with the judges’ orders, though he has rightly contested them in court.

He responded angrily to a judge’s order directing him to turn around planes carrying alleged members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, however. The president noted that he won the 2024 presidential election in part by promising to oppose illegal immigration.

“I’m just doing what the VOTERS wanted me to do,” Trump wrote. “This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!”

Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, introduced articles of impeachment against the judge in question, but Trump and other Republicans have taken efforts to address the systemic issue, as well.

The House Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the injunctions last month.

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, introduced the Restraining Judicial Insurrectionists Act of 2025, establishing a three-judge panel to swiftly review injunctions or other forms of declaratory relief against the president and the executive branch, with a quick appeal process to the Supreme Court.

Lee said the judges “have presumed to run the military, the civil service, foreign aid, and HR departments across the Executive Branch—blatantly unconstitutional overreach.”

Meanwhile, Trump issued a memo in March directing the heads of executive agencies to request that judges follow the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c), which requires the party requesting an injunction to put up “security in an amount that the court considers proper to pay the costs and damages sustained by any party found to have been wrongfully enjoined or restrained.” Rule 65(c) may not apply to every legal case, however.

John Roberts’ Job

Each of these efforts addresses one aspect of the problem, and Lee’s bill would likely address the issue most effectively. However, there is one person who has authority over the U.S. judiciary and could direct judges to be more circumspect before they issue nationwide injunctions that effectively make policy.

His name is… drumroll please… John Roberts.

When Roberts says reversing lower court mistakes is “what we’re there for,” he’s exactly right. In fact, as head of the judiciary, addressing major nationwide issues like the judicial insurrection is what he’s there for, specifically.

Perhaps, instead of complaining about Trump’s call to impeach judges, Roberts could solve the underlying problem himself by outlining how judges should act when considering temporary injunctions.

If he wants Trump and others to stop talking about impeaching judges, maybe he should step up and address the root problem.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

BETRAYAL: Chief Justice John Roberts Takes the Side of Deep State Swamp Creatures Against Trump

Trump Order Would Force the ACLU to Put Its Money Where Its Mouth Is on Lawfare

What Is Democrat Legality?

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

The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

Florida’s Red Flag Law

/in , , , , , , /by

The below article is a good follow-up of presentation I made at Winter Haven 912 meeting on that portion of Florida Red Flag Law allowing unconstitutional Risk Protection Orders to seize firearms, ammo, permits from someone accused of being a threat to themselves or others, e.g. based on something that has not happened yet, with no Due Process as a hearing is only provided after the seizure occurs. The few district court actions on this process which have been conducted so far upholding RPOs as constitutional are just wrong — period !

There are already existing laws/procedures on books which could authorize weapons seizures as needed e.g. Baker Act, Marchman Act and Court injuntions — the RPO is not needed.

How Do Red Flag Laws Work

Robert Sadowski — 

A red flag law is the common name given to Extreme Risk Protection Orders, Emergency Substantial Risk Orders, Firearm Restraining Orders, and a number of other official names that vary from state to state.

Essentially, red flag laws allow a civil court—a judge—to temporarily remove firearms from a person who is considered a threat to themselves or others. Other items deemed dangerous weapons can also be seized depending on the state. Red flag laws were enacted to protect people as a suicide-prevention tool, a method to stop domestic violence, or averting a potential mass shooting.

I think we—gun owners and non-gun owners—are all in favor of laws that protect our family, friends, and communities, but when the government, in this case, the state government, seizes our property, is that a violation of the 4th Amendment against unlawful search and seizure? What about the 2nd Amendment and the right to bear arms?

What States Have Red Flag Laws?

The following states have enacted Red Flag Laws:

  • California
  • Colorado
  • Connecticut
  • Delaware
  • Florida
  • Hawaii
  • Illinois
  • Indiana
  • Maine
  • Maryland
  • Massachusetts
  • Michigan
  • Minnesota
  • Nevada
  • New Jersey
  • New Mexico
  • New York
  • Oregon
  • Rhode Island
  • Vermont
  • Virginia
  • Washington
  • District of Columbia

Other states are considering adopting a red flag law.

The first state to enact a red flag law was Connecticut in 1999. A shooting at the Connecticut Lottery headquarters in 1998, where an employee shot and killed four of his supervisors and then killed himself, was the act that caused Connecticut to pass the law.

In 2022, under the Biden administration, the federal government created the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act to encourage states to adopt red flag laws. The act offers states grants if the state enacts and enforces red flag laws.

How Red Flag Laws Work

Each state has its own procedures on starting the process to seize a gun owner’s firearms, but generally operate the same way. Law Enforcement and/or family members petition a judge for an emergency order. That order would temporarily remove firearms from a person found to be at risk of harming themselves or someone else.

In all 21 states where red flag laws exist, law enforcement is allowed to petition a judge for an order. In New Mexico and Florida, law enforcement is the only one eligible to petition a judge. In states like California, Colorado, and Hawaii, family members, teachers, and medical professionals can also petition a judge.

Here’s how the scenario plays out. Someone is threatening to harm themselves or another person or people. Law enforcement, family members, teachers and medical professionals know or believe that person has access to a firearm, so they submit a petition to a judge.

The judge has the final word on whether the situation warrants an immediate order and evaluates it based on the specificity of the person’s threats and that person’s access to firearms. If the judge deems the risk of violence high, the judge can issue an emergency ex parte order, which goes into effect immediately without the person being present or notified in advance. An ex parte decision is one decided by a judge without requiring all of the parties to the dispute to be present.

The burden of proof on which the judge bases his or her decision is remarkably low for the initial seizure hearing, especially when you consider that no crime has been committed.

The length of time the guns are kept away from their owner varies by state and situation, but typically, a set time is established, and then the guns are returned unless other court hearings extend the period of confiscation.

The person named on the order can request their guns back and fight the order in court, at the person’s own expense, where they can present their side to the story. When guns are returned, law enforcement may conduct a background check before returning the firearms.

Do Red Flag Laws Work?

There is no central database that collects information on the effectiveness of red flag laws, but states like Connecticut credit the laws with a decrease in suicide. California touts that the law prevented mass shootings targeting schools.

On the other side of the coin, 42 states have declared themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries where law enforcement will not enforce gun policies that it believes violate the 2nd Amendment.

Do Red Flag Laws Violate the 2nd and 4th Amendment?

In recent years, red flag laws have been challenged and failed, with courts ruling that they are constitutional.

We should all understand how red flag laws work in the state we live.

Every law has loopholes that could potentially weaponize it against an unsuspecting person, even if the law was enacted in good faith.

©2025 . All rights reserved.

While Dems Flounder, GOP Speeds toward More Wins

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

Just how bad are things for the Democratic Party? Apart from the quiet mutiny against Senate leadership, the party of Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) is staring down its worst approval ratings in the history of NBC polling. Only a quarter of voters (27%) have positive views of the party, and a microscopic portion (7%) say those views are “very positive.” Making matters worse, the panic is blinding Democrats to their biggest threat — a Republican Party that keeps on winning.

At this point, pollster Jeff Horwitt shook his head, “The Democratic Party is not in need of a rebrand. It needs to be rebooted.” CNN’s grim numbers confirm it. Like NBC, the outlet found that the party’s favorability was also at a historic low, dropping 20 points (to 29%) since Joe Biden won the White House. But the problem staring down the grassroots is the same one facing headquarters: who should lead?

Most voters had trouble rallying around any one person who they felt “best reflects the core values” of the party. Managing just 10% of the vote, the Squad’s Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) just barely edged out former Vice President Kamala Harris (8%) as a possible standard-bearer. Ironically, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) who isn’t even a Democrat clocked in at 6% with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) tying him at 6%. Four percent named former President Barack Obama and Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), and the current persona non grata, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), in the basement at 2%. Perhaps more telling, more than 30% of participants couldn’t say. “No one,” one respondent answered. “That’s the problem.”

The Democrats’ identity crisis exploded on Thursday when Schumer shocked both sides by announcing his support for the GOP bill to keep the government open. Hardline leftists melted down, urging, as Crockett did, for Democrats “to decide whether or not Chuck Schumer is the one to lead in this moment.” Former Obama advisor Van Jones invoked former Senate Minority (and Majority) Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) as the kind of sandpaper Democrats need. “I remember when Obama had all the cards, Mitch McConnell drove Obama nuts — twisted his pinky, broke his kneecaps, and got stuff done for Republicans when they shouldn’t have gotten an inch. They got miles. We have a Senate majority leader who is beloved in this party, but we want somebody who’s gonna stand up to this bully.”

Others, like the only House Democrat to vote for the Republicans’ bill to extend government funding — Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine) — believe the American people want a party that will stop “shift[ing] into full resistance” to Donald Trump and get something done. Asked if his party was any closer to finding a “cohesive message and strategy,” the Mainer bluntly replied, “No.” In fact, he told NBC, the party is farther than ever from finding a solution to the blowout of last November. I think it’s very important that Democrats not forget to focus in on ourselves, why the American people voted, not just for President Trump, but for a Republican-led Congress in both the Senate and the House. And we better figure it out,” he warned.

While Golden’s party is scrambling, congressional Republicans seem more galvanized than ever. Fresh off their miracle government funding win, Johnson’s team is full speed ahead on the next big-ticket items on the docket: appropriations, rescission, and reconciliation. While the Democrats quarrel, the GOP is moving on an “aggressive timetable,” the speaker insisted to Family Research Council President Tony Perkins on Saturday’s “This Week on Capitol Hill.” The goal? Getting that “one big beautiful bill” on tax cuts, border security, defense, and the debt ceiling to the president’s desk by Memorial Day. “It’s going to take a lot of hard work around the clock,” Johnson stressed, “quite literally.”

Before the spat over a government shutdown, Johnson pulled off another stunner — squeaking the House framework for reconciliation through his chamber by a 217-215 vote. Now that his party agrees on the blueprint, they’ll get to work on the particulars of this process which would essentially roll all of Trump’s biggest legislative priorities into one package that can be passed by a simple majority. As Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) reminds everyone, this strategy is how most modern presidents have won their most transformational agendas. “They passed Obamacare through reconciliation. They passed the Inflation Reduction Act through reconciliation,” he said referring to Democrats under Obama and Biden. “It [would] be a political malpractice for us not to do it,” he argued on Thursday’s “Washington Watch.”

Right now, Johnson said, conservatives are looking at a “floor of $1.5 trillion in savings” through reconciliation. “But many of us would like to go much higher than that,” he stressed. “So that’s where all the details, all the negotiation, all the deliberation over the coming weeks will come in.”

But that’s just one part of a three-track train. On top of reconciliation, Republicans are already hard at work on budgeting for the federal agencies, which they’ll have until September 30 to finish. Now that the continuing resolution is in effect, the House is teeing up appropriations for FY 26, “which is the much more exciting prospect,” Johnson believes. “That’s when we will codify all the DOGE cuts of fraud, waste, abuse, [and tap into] the new revenue streams that President Trump and the administration are bringing about. It’s going to be a very different budgeting and appropriations cycle than we’ve ever seen,” he promised. In part, because it could be the first time Congress passes a federal budget through regular order in about 20 years.

In the meantime, the White House is zeroing in on its own basket of cuts that it will send over for congressional approval. “It’s a bit wonkish,” Graham agreed, “but rescission allows [the president] to cut the discretionary budget without 60 votes.” In other words, all of these boondoggles that Elon Musk is identifying can be rolled back legislatively if a simple majority of both chambers agree with the president’s request. “We’re very excited about that,” Johnson said, “because this is the point that we’ve been trying to get to most of our careers. We finally have a White House that is willing to work with conservatives in Congress to scale down government.”

“All of the crazy stuff,” Graham pointed out — the transgender comic books and birth control in Afghanistan and so many other absurd projects — could be erased. “The White House needs to give us the top 10 or 20 examples of wasteful spending that DOGE found, send them over to the Senate and the House — and within 45 days, we have to act. I want the American people to see … that we’re going to clean the underbrush and take the garbage out of the budget. And I want them to see that we’re going to rebuild our military and secure our border” — and still spend less than Biden.

When it comes to waste, “We’re going to qualify it, quantify it, and then codify it,” the speaker declared. And there’s no time like the present, Graham agreed. “We’ve had the House, the Senate, and the White House as Republicans four times in the last hundred years.” This is our chance, he urged. “We should take it.”

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Rasmussen Poll on Optimism for the Future Hits All-Time High Under Trump

Polls Show Massive Shift Away from Transgender Political Agenda Since 2022

‘Plot Against America’: Trump Admin Deports Venezuelan Terrorists Despite Judge’s ‘Screwy’ Order

Dept. of Ed Launches Investigations after Warning 50+ Universities to Get Rid of DEI

‘We Have to Protect Our Jewish Students’: Johnson Applauds Trump’s Anti-Semitism Crackdown

RELATED VIDEO: The Democrat Party Is Falling Apart

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.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’ State of the State Address for 2025

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

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis gave the State of the State address on March 4th, 2025. The following excerpts are of great interest to those of us who support the 2nd Amendment, including Constitutional Carry and rescinding Risk Protection Orders, part of Florida’s Red Flag Law.

Governor DeSantis is spot on with both.

“We need to be a strong Second Amendment state so let’s get some positive reform done for the people of Florida,” DeSantis said.

Some GOP lawmakers have filed bills to repeal that provision in recent years, but they haven’t passed. Moreover, Albritton has said he opposes a move for open carry – allowing firearms to be carried openly in public – because law enforcement officials are against it. DeSantis, though, has said he’ll sign such a bill if it passes the Legislature.

At a press conference immediately after the State of the State speech, DeSantis said he wanted to re-evaluate the state’s red flag law, for example. It allows law enforcement to remove guns from someone who is deemed a threat to themselves or someone else.

DeSantis said he has a problem when the law puts the burden on the person to convince a court they are not a threat. The burden should be on the government, he said: “I think it’s a huge due process violation.”

Governor Ron DeSantis Delivers State of the State Address

March 4, 2025

TALLAHASSEE Fla.—Today, Governor Ron DeSantis delivered the 2025 State of the State address to the joint legislative session from the Florida House of Representatives chamber in Tallahassee. Watch the full address here. You can find a full transcript of his State of the State address below:

Mr. Speaker, Mr. President, members of the cabinet and Legislature, and fellow citizens:

Florida leads.

We lead with purpose and conviction.
We lead with determination and strength.
We lead with faith, and we lead with hope.

Anyone can hold the helm while the sea is calm.

Leadership matters when it is hard.

Florida is the leader among the states because we lean into challenges, tackle the big issues, and deliver results for the people we serve.

In these endeavors we are mindful of the adage from an American philosopher:

“If you don’t know where you are going, you might wind up some place else.”

Yogi Berra was right to articulate—as only he could—the need for clear direction.

We are guided in our efforts by a strong commitment to the principles on which our country was founded and that have endured for centuries:
That our rights come from God, not government.
That constitutional limitations on government’s power are essential to preserve liberty.
That ours is a government of laws, not of men.
That government derives its power from the consent of the people.

The sturdy foundation of American principles is the guide that the free state of Florida must never abandon.

We have stood in the breach and protected our people from noxious ideologies and trendy—but empty—social fads.

We chose freedom over fear; education over indoctrination; law and order over rioting and disorder.

We are proud of our state’s accomplishments while we recognize the work that lies ahead.

Our rudder is set.
Our compass is in hand.
True north is our destination.

We can—and we must—continue to lead.

We are convening for the regular Legislative session having already enacted groundbreaking legislation to fulfill the historic mission of delivering on President Donald Trump’s mandate to end the illegal immigration crisis once and for all.

No state has done more, and no state did it sooner than we did in Florida.

Thanks to the recent legislation, it is now a crime to enter Florida illegally, the days of catch and release are over, and all state and local law enforcement have a duty to assist in interior immigration enforcement efforts.

The voters have spoken—and Florida has responded—we will be part of the solution, not part of the problem.

Joining us today are two great leaders in this effort: Immigration Czar Larry Keefe and Brevard County Sheriff Wayne Ivey.

With leaders like Larry and Wayne, Florida will get the job done.

We are not a sanctuary state; we are a rule of law state!

Florida has also led the way in creating a strong economic environment.

For the past two years, Florida’s economy has ranked #1 in these United States.

We also rank #1 in entrepreneurship, #1 in new business formations, #1 in GDP growth among large states, and have an unemployment rate that is lower than the national average for more than 50 months straight!

We represented the refuge for freedom and sanity during the coronavirus pandemic, not just for the rest of the country but for the entire world.

People moved here. Businesses flocked to our state. And investment in Florida surged.

We continue to set tourism records. 2024 saw more than 142 million visitors to our state.

This includes 3.3 million visitors from Canada. Not much of a boycott.

Maybe they wanted to get a glimpse of what a Stanley Cup-winning hockey team looks like!

The Legislature has enacted historic reforms that have improved economic conditions and addressed difficult issues like insurance.

Because of these reforms, automobile insurance rates are finally coming down—between 6 and 10.5% average reductions for the three largest companies—even as rates continue to skyrocket nationwide.

And our homeowners’ insurance market is seeing stability:

  • 1 new companies have entered the market.
  • 130,000 new private policies over the past year.
  • In 2024, Florida had the lowest increase in rates of all 50 states.
  • 73% of citizens homeowners in Miami-Dade are scheduled to receive a decrease on average of 6.3%.

The fact is that the Legislature has devoted more time and effort to address insurance reforms over the past few years than at any other time in the history of Florida.

I hope that the Legislature continues these efforts by providing funding for those on the My Safe Florida Home waitlist—these grants have helped tens of thousands harden their homes and generate rate relief.

The program is a testament to the Legislature’s commitment to helping homeowners—it has made a difference and can do so again.

Our economy is strong in part because our spending and budget policies are sensible.

We are actually spending less money in the current fiscal year than we did in the previous year. Where else have they actually reduced spending?

We have the lowest number of state government workers per capita in the country.

Over the past six years, we have more than tripled our state’s rainy day fund.

Florida just celebrated its 180th birthday and I’m happy to say that just since 2019, we have paid off 41% of the debt accumulated over those 180 years.

Our state has among the lowest per capita state debt in America.

The share of Florida’s debt for each citizen is about $660; the share of the national debt for each US citizen is more than $100,000.

Can the Congressmen in Washington, D.C. please take a page out of Florida’s fiscal playbook?

Florida is a free state in part because we are a low tax state.

We have one of the top five tax environments in the nation, have no income tax, and have enacted billions of dollars in tax cuts over the past six years.

We must continue to be a friend to the taxpayer.

In addition to our traditional tax holidays, I am proposing we add holidays for marine fuel to help our boaters and anglers and a Second Amendment summer for the purchases of firearms, ammo and accoutrements.

Florida remains the only state in America to tax business rent—and while we have reduced the rate of the tax it is time to eliminate it.

While Florida property values have surged in recent years, this has come at a cost to taxpayers squeezed by increasing local government property taxes.

Escalating assessments have created a gusher of revenue for local governments—and many in Florida have seen their budgets increase far beyond the growth in population.

Taxpayers need relief.

You buy a home, pay off a mortgage—and yet you still have to write a check to the government every year just to live on your own property?

Is the property yours or are you just renting from the government?

I know members of the Legislature are studying the issue in anticipation of formulating a proposal to place on the 2026 ballot to provide constitutional protections for Florida property owners.

Please know you have my support.

Oh, and one other thing—don’t let anyone tell you we will seek to raise state taxes, because we will not.

We are—and will remain—a taxpayer-friendly state!

Florida has also led on education—and has been ranked #1 in America for the past two years.

We are the top state in America for school choice. This has changed lives.

Joining us today is Harli McCullough, whose son, Thorne, is a recipient of Florida’s family empowerment scholarship for unique abilities.

Thorne attends the Jacksonville School for Autism because of the scholarship. He can now pursue an education that fits his unique needs instead of being forced into a one-size-fits-all approach.

Our universal school choice program works—families and students have benefitted, and the academic bar has been raised throughout the state.

It is a great testament to the Legislature that Florida was the first state to enact such an ambitious and far-reaching choice program.

We recognize the importance of recruiting and retaining great teachers.

We have enacted a teachers bill of rights, provided protection against coerced union dues, and invested a record $4.6 billion to raise teacher salaries.

I’m pleased to be joined by Hernando County teacher Jaime Suarez, who has been selected as Florida’s Teacher of the Year. Jaime is a High Impact teacher, is the grade team lead and mentor, and serves on the district’s textbook selection committee.

Thanks for making a difference, Jaime!

I am again recommending an increase in money dedicated to increasing teacher salaries, as well as continuation of the civics bonus program that gives a $3,000 bonus to all teachers that complete our civics seal of excellence training course.

Our universities have earned strong commendations—we currently have four state universities ranked in the top 50 public universities in the nation.

Universities must be dedicated to the pursuit of truth, the promotion of academic rigor and integrity, and the preparation of students to be citizens of our republic.

We led the way in being the first state to eliminate DEI from our higher education system.

We continue to lead by holding the line on tuition. We have not allowed a tuition increase since I’ve been governor and Florida has the lowest in-state tuition in America.

Florida families deserve state universities that provide education, not indoctrination. And that education must be attainable regardless of financial status. I’m happy to report that, in this regard, we are delivering.

Florida has led on some of the most intractable issues, ranging from substance abuse to child welfare.

Hope Florida was devised by our First Lady, Casey DeSantis to transform the way government agencies provided services to our fellow citizens in need.

Rather than perpetuate dependence on a Great Society-style bureaucracy, Hope Florida seeks to use government to connect individuals and families to more than 5,600 faith-based, community and private sector partners.

Ginger Faulk illustrates Hope Florida’s impact. Ginger was struggling to make ends meet and her goal of becoming a physical therapist seemed like an elusive dream. Thanks to the help of a Hope Florida navigator, Ginger was connected to resources that helped her complete a physical therapy program. She is now a Physical Therapy assistant and has achieved her dream.

By the end of 2024, Hope Florida has helped nearly 30,000 participants reduce or eliminate their reliance on government assistance, netting the taxpayers over $108 million in annual savings.

In the aftermath of Hurricanes Debby, Helene, and Milton, Activate Hope—the emergency relief arm of Hope Florida—helped over 57,000 Floridians with essential supplies and provided more than 33,000 with referrals to overcome disaster-related hardships.

The Hope Florida model is now being replicated by other states around the country.

Thanks to Casey for her leadership and ingenuity!

We are fortunate to live in a naturally beautiful state.

We promised to leave Florida to God better than we found, and we are doing just that.

The Florida Wildlife Corridor—established in 2021—now spans 18 million acres, with 10 million acres already protected. Last year, we directed FDOT to enhance connectivity within the corridor. Since 2019, we have approved over $129 million for 38 crossings, ensuring safer passage for species like the Florida panther.

We have shattered records for state support for Everglades restoration, for water quality improvements, and for beach renourishment.

While our efforts have been strong, the federal government has lagged in its responsibilities regarding Everglades restoration. I am happy to report that the Trump administration is receptive to block granting money to us so that we can complete these projects ourselves.

Florida time is faster than Army Corps of Engineers time.

Our Florida paradise was interrupted by a series of hurricanes over the past year. These storms brought major destruction but also witnessed a strong emergency response across state and local governments.

Utility lineman were pre-staged and millions of customers who lost power were restored in record time.

Massive amounts of debris were removed, including a round-the-clock emergency effort to marshal state assets to remove Hurricane Helene debris in advance of Hurricane Milton.

The search and rescue effort was momentous. This includes the rescue of a dog that had been abandoned on the side of I-75 in advance of Milton. FHP Trooper Orlando Morales rescued the dog as water was rising to the dog’s neck. The dog has ben renamed “Trooper” and is now in a safe and loving home.

Thank you, Trooper Morales!

We have utilized available levers—from the Florida Disaster Fund to the small business loan program—to help individuals and businesses get back on their feet.

We are joined by Cainnon Gregg, the Founder of Pelican Oyster Co. His farm was devasted by Hurricane Michael and, after rebuilding, was hit again by Helene and Milton. Mr. Gregg will be a recipient of grant funds to support his rebuilding efforts and to get his business back to normal.

The recovery efforts after major hurricanes persist long after the cameras leave. I know more needs to be done and you can count on me to be supportive of future legislative support for these important recoveries.

We know we have other issues to address:

  • Petition/amendment fraud
  • Condos
  • Second Amendment

Before I conclude I would be remiss if I didn’t remind everybody of some of the other accomplishments that, together, we have achieved over the past six years:

We banned China from purchasing land in Florida.

We enacted a digital bill of rights.

We protected Floridians against the imposition of a central bank digital currency.

We instituted the death penalty for pedophiles.

We created a program to accelerate the repayment of state debt – saving hundreds of millions of dollars in interest costs.

We enacted protections for the sanctity of life.

We codified parental rights in education.

We created a law enforcement bonus and scholarship program to recruit and retain great police officers.

We divested state financial holdings from Chinese banks and investment firms.

We kneecapped so-called ESG in our pension fund, in the workplace and in financial institutions.

We brought transparency and accountability to pharma companies to lower drug costs.

We initiated the Moving Florida Forward program to accelerate over 20 infrastructure and congestion relief projects across the state.

We provided billions of dollars in tax relief, including the permanent elimination of sales tax on essential baby items.

I could go on, but in the interest of time I’ll just say that, working together, we have amassed a record that is without peer anywhere in the country.

To our presiding officers, Speaker Perez and President Albritton, I look forward to work together to advance our shared goals.

Speaker Perez represents the busy, fast-paced modern Miami, the gateway to the Americas—a unique place not just in our state but in our country.

President Albritton represents the Florida heartland that is sometimes overlooked but that has served as the backbone of our state for generations.

While coming from differing backgrounds, these leaders have a strong desire to make Florida a better place. Congratulations on earning this opportunity to lead your respective chambers.

To our Chief Financial Officer Jimmy Patronis—thank you for your service to our state as you prepare to get called up to the big leagues to serve in Congress. My advice is stay true to Northwest Florida values and don’t catch Potomac fever. Oh, and if you can get them to handle the budget up there like we do down here you will be doing a great service to the country!

Commissioner Simpson, you will soon be the most tenured member of the cabinet. Your department has made significant improvements since you’ve taken over from your predecessor. You have stepped up as part of our state immigration board to assist in the state’s effort to combat illegal immigration and I thank you for it.

Our new Attorney General James Uthmeier has been instrumental in many of the successes I’ve outlined today. I was happy to appoint him to be the state’s top law enforcement officer and he is already off to a great start!

To the members of the Legislature, you are entrusted by your constituents to exercise sound judgment on their behalf. You have been more productive than any Legislature in America over these past six years. You should be proud of that work and of your willingness to serve.

As Teddy Roosevelt famously said:

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while doing greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”

My friends, we have great opportunities over the next sixty days.

The people of Florida are watching.

Let’s work together to solidify our successes and address the challenges before us.

Our voyage is not yet complete.

Our goal is to one day say, in the words of Walt Whitman:

“O Captain! O Captain! Our fearful trip is done,

The ship has weather’d every rack, the prize we sought is won.”

Good luck and God bless!

©2025  . All rights reserved.

The Democratic Fork in the Road and the Woke Repudiation Imperative

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

Yogi Berra, the mid-century New York Yankees Hall of Fame catcher known for his pithy and often humorous life observations, once famously quipped: “When you come to a fork in the road, take it.” It was sound advice, perhaps, for a traveler on the go and in search of a quick meal. But the modern Democratic Party, rudderless and confused and reeling from a pitiful collective performance during Tuesday evening’s presidential joint address to Congress, now confronts a fork in the road that’s no joke.

On the one hand lies the path of least resistance: doubling down on the status quo—the progressive culture-warring, woke/identity politics-driven agenda that has dominated the party ever since Barack Obama upset Hillary Clinton in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary. On the other hand lies the more difficult but ultimately more promising path: repudiation of that post-2008 legacy and a conscientious return to a politics of the prudential center. Which path Democrats choose from here will go a long way toward determining their relevance as a national political party for the foreseeable future.

Obama’s shocking upset over the madam-president-in-waiting was an inflection point for the institutional trajectory of the Democratic Party. Voters rejected the cultural centrism that was a Clinton-era hallmark in favor of the “hope” and “change” promised by Obama’s “coalition of the ascendant.” Initially, perhaps, that may have looked like a smart bet: Obama trounced John McCain in the 2008 presidential general election. But the one-time “coalition of the ascendant” transmogrified into an identitarian and deeply off-putting “coalition of aggrieved interests.” Culturally militant wokeism eventually reached its pernicious apex during Joe Biden’s presidency—which saw the first explicitly “DEI” Supreme Court justice selection (Ketanji Brown Jackson, after Biden vowed to nominate a black woman) and a diversity, equity, and inclusion vice presidential running mate (Kamala Harris, after Biden was pressured to choose a black woman).

This version of the Democratic Party, which featured the progenitor of wokeism, Obama himself, as the leading presidential campaign trail surrogate for Harris, was thoroughly rejected in November by the American people. It turns out that voters didn’t really know what they were signing up for when they embarked on an extended political journey of “hope” and “change.” They weren’t interested—and aren’t interested—in legitimizing the juvenile genital mutilation and chemical castration that has been euphemistically sold as “gender-affirming care.” They weren’t interested—and aren’t interested—in assenting to wide-scale importation and resettlement of foreigners whose cultures and customs are antithetical to our own.

Some leading Democrats do finally seem to get the memo. Former Clinton strategist James Carville, for instance, has called for Democrats to distance themselves from the excesses of woke civilizational arson. But many others disagree. There is no indication at all, for instance, that the ladies of “The View” have done any introspection: Shortly after November’s electoral shellacking, cohost Sunny Hostin attributed Harris’ loss to Donald Trump to “racism” and “misogyny.” Surveying the left-of-center punditocracy scene, it often seems that there are far more Hostin-like voices of escalation than there are Carville-like voices of sobriety.

Democratic elected officials are also deeply split. California Gov. Gavin Newsom made headlines this week by repudiating certain facets of wokeism during an interview with Charlie Kirk, but congressional Democrats attending Trump’s joint address to Congress on Tuesday evening took the opposite approach, beyond refusing to applaud: Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, obnoxiously heckled the president and was kicked out of the House chamber within the speech’s first few minutes–deservedly so. In general, their conduct was positively buffoonish.

In what world do Democrats think they do themselves any political favors with these antics and, more important, these underlying substantive political stances? One guest of Trump on Tuesday, Payton McNabb, is a female former high school athlete who was grievously injured during a match against a team with a biological male player. On this issue, recent CNN polling indicates that roughly four-fifths of Americans oppose biological male participation in female athletic competitions. Even Newsom, in his podcast episode with Kirk, called the practice “deeply unfair.”

Newsom seems to be reading the tea leaves—unlike congressional Democrats. There is a similar divide on the issue of illegal immigration and so-called sanctuary jurisdictions; consider, for instance, New York City Mayor Eric Adams’ high-profile flip on the issue, which has brought him into line with Trump.

To make matters even worse, a majority of Democratic elites too often now come across not merely as schoolmarmish and excessively self-righteous—but as heartless and lacking compassion, to boot. Party leaders undoubtedly think of themselves as “compassionate,” especially for those perceived as being “oppressed” (on the neo-Marxist intersectional scale of victimization status). But where is the compassion for McNabb? Where is the compassion for the family of Laken Riley, the Athens, Georgia, student whose life was tragically cut short by an illegal alien who never should have been on our soil?

In order to recover their standing and regain lasting relevance as an electorally feasible national political party, Democrats are going to have to repudiate the entirety of their post-2008/post-Obama cultural legacy. That is the simple truth. The American people want a stable pocketbook, a stable border and a stable world stage. They’re not interested in the Obama-Biden-Harris Democratic Party’s idiosyncratic conception of waging a culture war.

Are Democrats up to such a challenge? The intraparty civil war is on—but I certainly have my doubts. Unless and until they do repudiate their cultural militance, however, Democrats will continue to flounder about in irrelevance. Perhaps they’ll need to get their clocks cleaned at the ballot box a few more times. That wouldn’t be the worst thing.

COPYRIGHT 2025 CREATORS.COM

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.

AUTHOR

Josh Hammer

Josh Hammer, a syndicated columnist, is senior editor-at-large at Newsweek and a research fellow with the Edmund Burke Foundation. He also is counsel and policy adviser for the Internet Accountability Project and contributing editor for Anchoring Truths. Josh on X: .

RELATED ARTICLES:

What’s Wrong With Democrats?

After DEI, What’s Next?

Here’s Why Democrats’ Feeble Attempts to Moderate Are Doomed to Fail

RELATED  VIDEO: Bill O’Reilly: Donald Trump is bringing the Democratic Party “on the verge of COLLAPSE.”

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

The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

Teenage boy confronted by two armed home invaders and guess what happened?

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

Things did not turn out well for the two middle-aged men who thought they’d rob a soft-target household while the child’s parents were not home. 

A 14-year-old Kentucky boy protected his home from two armed intruders during a brazen pre-dawn home invasion that occurred around 4:24 a.m. on Feb. 15 in the sleepy little town of Manchester, population 1,500.

According to Kentucky State Police (KSP), the boy was home alone when two men, identified as Roger Smith, 44, of McKee, Ky, and Jeffrey Allen, 51, of Manchester, forcibly entered the residence with guns drawn.

The two men reportedly wanted to steal firearms from the family safe. The teenage boy immediately confronted the intruders, who were each holding pistols, and acted swiftly to protect himself and his home.

Faced with the immediate threat, the 14-year-old retrieved a handgun and fired multiple shots at the intruders before escaping through a bedroom window.

Smith was transported to Advent Health Manchester but later succumbed to his wounds, while Allen was pronounced dead at the scene.

Police determined the boy acted in self-defense and will not face any charges.

Manchester Police Chief Jeff Couch told NBC News it is unclear how the teen was able to find the handgun, which belonged to his father.

However, I think the chief and NBC News missed the point. The issue wasn’t how did he find his dad’s handgun, it’s how did be become so adept at using it?

This boy could not have taken out two armed criminals, who were likely pretty gun savvy themselves given their ages and line of work, if he had just “retrieved” his dad’s gun and started firing away at the intruders. He had to have been well trained, probably by his dad. I could see getting lucky with one shot, but not when outgunned two-to-one and you still hit both of your targets with kill shots before they’re able to hit you. That takes real skill, especially under the stress of the moment that this child faced.

The pro-Second Amendment website GunsAmerica.com hit closer to the issue at hand than NBC, stating:

“This incident shows why it’s important to teach responsible kids how to safely handle firearms. When faced with real danger, this young man’s knowledge and quick thinking helped protect him and his home.”

Imagine if Kentucky had laws in place like some blue states that require citizens to keep their firearms unloaded and stored in a safe. This boy would likely not be alive right now because he would not have been able to confront and stop the threat if he’d had to go to the safe, remember the combination to unlock it, and then load a gun.

Question: How young is too young to train children in the proper use of firearms? I’m guessing it depends on the child and the family situation. Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments below.

©2025 . All rights reserved.

Please visit Leo’s Newsletter substack.

IDF Reveals 10-Month-Old Baby, 4-Year-Old Brother Beaten To Death By Hamas Terrorists

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

Daniel Hagari, the Israel Defense Forces’ (IDF) spokesperson, announced that the dead children returned Thursday to Israel from Gaza were beaten to death by terrorists.

“We can confirm that baby Kfir Bibas, aged just 10 months old, and his older brother Ariel, aged four, were both brutally murdered by terrorists while being held hostage in Gaza no later than November 2023,” the spokesperson said. “Contrary to Hamas’ lies, Ariel and Kfir were not killed in an airstrike. Ariel and Kfir Bibas were murdered by terrorists in cold blood. The terrorists did not shoot the two young boys. They killed them with their bare hands.”

The two boys were taken hostage by Hamas along with their mother, Shiri and their father, Yarden, during the Oct. 7, 2023 terror attack against Israel. Yarden was released on Feb. 1. Hamas paraded the coffins of the dead children in a ceremony accompanied by a cheering crowd Thursday where they handed the remains of the hostages to the Red Cross.

They were expected to hand over the remains of Shiri as well but the body they handed over was not hers, the Institute of Forensic Medicine (IFM) said, The Jerusalem Post reported. The IFM and Israel Police jointly performed forensic analyses to identify the remains. Officials said the act violated the agreement between Israel and Hamas, adding that the organization was under an obligation to return the bodies under the ceasefire agreement that took effect Jan. 19

“Not only did they kidnap the father, Yarden Bibas, the young mother, Shiri, and their two little babies. In an unspeakably cynical way, they did not return Shiri to her little children, the little angels, and they put the body of a Gazan woman in a coffin,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wrote on social media in Hebrew.

The IDF identified Oded Lifshitz, who was among the remains Hamas handed over Thursday, according to The Jerusalem Post.

AUTHOR

Ilan Hulkower

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The death cult of lies

BBC Says It’s Really Sorry For Featuring Terrorist’s Son In Documentary, Swears It Was Accident

The Child Murderers of Gaza

RELATED VIDEOS:

Murdered Bibas Boys and a Death Cult’s Ritual of Child Sacrifice

Who kidnaps a little boy and a baby and murders them? Monsters. That’s who.

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