Tag Archive for: Hot Topics

“Operation Clean House,” Fugitives, sex offenders among 491 arrested in HUD public housing fraud crackdown

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

Sharron Angle reported today on the Conservative Commandos Radio Show about The 491 arrests during “Operation Clean House,” a nationwide federal crackdown targeting fraud, fugitives, sex offenders, and unauthorized individuals living in taxpayer-funded public housing.

  • The Operation: Announced by U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Scott Turner, the sweep was led by the HUD Office of Inspector General alongside the U.S. Marshals Service and local and state authorities across 12 states (including New York and California).
  • Who Was Arrested: The 491 individuals included fugitives, drug traffickers, sex offenders, people accused of crimes against children, and individuals living in the country unlawfully who were improperly residing in HUD-assisted housing units.

©2026 . All rights reserved.

The Truth About the Global Democratic Socialist Islamist Alliance

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

“Hamas and Hezbollah are social movements that are progressive, that are part of the left, that are part of the global left.” — Judith Butler, Berkeley professor and feminist theorist

In his article “The Red-Green Alliance” Kevin Briggins wrote: One of the more perplexing political questions of our day is how leftist progressives end up aligned with Islamists. When Zohran Mamdani ran for office in New York City, he did so as a Muslim promoting the protection of transgender people, an idea that is completely out of step with his religious views. Yet Mamdani isn’t alone in this posture. In recent years, an unexpected partnership has emerged between secular progressives or socialists and certain Islamist movements. It’s often called the Red-Green Alliance—“red” for the revolutionary left and “green” for political Islam. This raises a fundamental question: how do left-wing activists reconcile their ideological commitments with support for extreme Islamic regimes and movements?

Islamist–Leftist Coalitions: The Actual Record

The real story is messier and more interesting than either side’s talking points. These coalitions exist, they’re mostly tactical rather than ideological, and they tend to form when both parties are being squeezed by the same regime.

The Arab World: Where It’s Real and Documented

The most sustained cases come from the Middle East, where Islamist and leftist movements have shared the same oppositional terrain since the 1960s.

  • Egypt — The Muslim Brotherhood allied with the Wafd in the 1980s, then with the Labour Party starting in 1987. Critics accused the Brotherhood of infiltrating rather than cooperating—a recurring pattern where the stronger partner absorbs the weaker.
  • Jordan — The deepest case. The Islamic Action Front (IAF) and leftist parties formed the Higher Committee for the Coordination of National Opposition Parties (HCCNOP) in 1994. It lasted twelve years and expanded from anti-Israel/anti-US foreign policy into a broader critique of the regime’s authoritarianism. The Anti-Normalization Committee (1995) was a single-issue coalition built to oppose the Jordan–Israel peace treaty.
  • Yemen — The Islah party (Islamist) and the Yemen Socialist Party (YSP)—literally former enemies who’d been killing each other—formed the Joint Meeting Group ahead of the 2003 elections. They divided districts: Islah sat out 30 where the YSP was stronger; the YSP sat out 130 where Islah was stronger. Cold-blooded electoral arithmetic.

The pattern: cooperation emerges when a repressive regime closes the political system and forces everyone into the same opposition bucket. It’s about shared enemies, not shared philosophy.

🇬🇧 Britain: The Respect Experiment

The clearest Western case is Respect, the coalition formed around George Galloway and the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) with the Muslim Association of Britain, largely off the back of the Stop the War Coalition.

  • It was an electoral vehicle built on anti-war sentiment and Muslim community mobilization.
  • It won a handful of seats but collapsed—one analysis called it “ideologically stillborn,” because you can’t fuse two fundamentally different ways of understanding the world into one party and expect it to hold.
  • The underlying tension: Muslims’ religious interests often sit to the right of center, while their socioeconomic interests sit on the left. The coalition only works as long as the economic issues dominate.

🇪🇺 Europe: Voting Blocs, Not Alliances

In Western Europe, the relationship is mostly one-directional—Muslim voters supporting left parties, not formal Islamist-left coalitions.

  • France 2012: ~86% of Muslim voters backed Hollande (Socialist).
  • UK 2017: ~85% of British Muslims voted Labour.
  • Belgium: A majority of Muslim parliamentarians between 1989 and 2009 were socialists.

The Dissent analysis makes the key point: this is transactional, not ideological. Muslims vote left because the right is openly hostile and the left protects housing, healthcare, education, and immigrant rights. Meanwhile, diaspora Turks and Tunisians vote more conservatively abroad than they do at home—60% for the AKP overseas vs. 49.5% domestically. That’s a warning sign for anyone assuming the left has a permanent lock on this electorate.

Why These Coalitions Form (and Break)

Formation triggers:

  1. A shared enemy — imperialism, Zionism, US intervention, or a domestic authoritarian regime
  2. A closed political system — when you can’t win alone, you find partners
  3. Single-issue vehicles — war, Palestine, anti-normalization

Fracture lines:

  1. Gender and family law — Islamists draw hard red lines on gender roles and sharia application; leftists can’t cross those same lines
  2. Secularism — the left’s core commitment, and Islamists’ frequent target
  3. Constituency competition — both groups recruit from the same poor, religious, working-class base. They’re rivals as much as allies.
  4. Asymmetry — one partner usually absorbs or dominates the other, which breeds resentment

The Honest Take

The “alliance” is real but rarely strategic and almost never ideological. It’s an alliance of convenience between two groups that want different end-states but can agree on who they hate right now. The academic literature on the 1960s–2010s record is blunt about this: cooperation is “primarily when political opportunities render it useful.”

The strongest version is Jordan’s HCCNOP—twelve years, expanding agenda. The weakest is a one-off protest committee that dissolves when the war ends.

The Demographics: Who Votes With Whom, and Why

This is where the “alliance” claim gets tested against actual numbers. And the numbers tell a story that’s less about ideology and more about exclusion—plus one genuinely surprising 2024 anomaly in the US.

🇪🇺 Europe: The 30-Point Gap That Won’t Close

The single most robust finding in the literature: Muslims vote left far more than non-Muslims do.

  • In Western Europe, the gap in left-party support between Muslims and non-Muslims exceeds 30 percentage points.
  • Roughly 56% of Muslims vote left vs. 25% of non-Muslims.
  • This holds even after controlling for income, education, and language integration.

The mechanism isn’t ideology—it’s exclusion. The research is blunt: the more Muslims feel discriminated against, the more they vote as a bloc for the left. And here’s the uncomfortable part for everyone involved:

The radical right keeps the left politically viable. As far-right parties gain ground, Muslims get “driven back into the arms of the political left.” Integration reduces left voting—so the left’s Muslim base is strongest exactly when the right is strongest.

Demographic texture of the Muslim left vote:

  • Younger (avg. age ~40 vs. ~53 for non-Muslim voters)
  • More male-skewed — the “modern gender gap” reverses: Muslim men are more left than Muslim women
  • More religious (religiosity ~7.1 vs. ~4.2 on the scale)
  • More manual labor, higher unemployment

🇬🇧 Britain: The Strongest Western Alignment

  • ~85% of British Muslims voted Labour in 2017.
  • 2024 pre-election: Labour ~63%, Conservatives ~12%, Lib Dems ~12%, Green ~7%, Reform UK ~1%.
  • Age divide is stark: 63–65% of Muslims under 55 say Labour best represents them, vs. only 37% of those over 55 (who lean Lib Dem).
  • Top issues: NHS (57%), cost of living (51%), economy (48%)—not identity politics.
  • Notably: Muslim voters were twice as likely as the general population to say they might change their mind.

Translation: this is a conditional relationship. The loyalty is to the party that delivers material goods and protection from hostility—not a philosophical marriage.

🇺🇸 America 2024: The Anomaly Worth Paying Attention To

This is the interesting one, because it breaks the European pattern—and it broke hard.

CAIR’s 2024 exit poll (1,575 verified Muslim voters):

Candidate Muslim Vote
Jill Stein (Green) 53%
Donald Trump 21%
Kamala Harris 20%
Cornel West 1.4%
Other 3.6%

Michigan specifically: Stein 59%, Trump 22%, Harris 14%.

Compare that to 2020, when Biden won the Muslim vote overwhelmingly. The bottom fell out—driven by Gaza, not by any collapse in economic interest alignment. The pre-election polling showed Stein and Harris statistically tied at 42–41%, and then on election day Stein overperformed and Harris underperformed even the final poll.

Why this matters for the “alliance” thesis:

  • Muslim Americans didn’t move right in any ideological sense. They moved to a left third party (Stein) or abstained—or, notably, 21% went Trump, which is a foreign-policy protest vote, not a conversion.
  • It shows the coalition is hostage to foreign policy. When the left’s foreign policy offends the base, the base defects—and it defects in any direction available.

Racial splits within the Muslim vote (pre-election):

  • Black Muslims: 55% Harris
  • Asian Muslims: 28% Harris
  • White/Arab/Turkic: 25.6% Harris
  • Stein did best among White/Arab/Turkic (32.7%)

What the Demographics Actually Prove

  1. It’s a socioeconomic coalition, not a theological one. Muslims vote left for jobs, housing, healthcare, and protection from discrimination. The left needs Muslim votes to stay viable in a shifting electorate. Both sides are using each other.
  2. Exclusion is the glue. The more a society pushes Muslims out, the more they vote as a bloc—and the more they vote left. Integrate them and the coalition frays.
  3. Foreign policy is the fault line that can break it overnight. The 2024 US result is the proof of concept.
  4. It’s not monolithic. Age, gender, race, and religiosity all move the numbers significantly. There is no single “Muslim vote.”

The “Democratic Socialist Islamist Alliance” isn’t a pact—it’s a voting pattern produced by shared material interest and shared enemies, and it’s more fragile than either its champions or its critics admit.

©2026 . All rights reserved.

RESOURCES:

The Red-Green Alliance

Muslims’ Vote Choice: Exclusion and Group Voting in Europe cogitatiopress.comDo Muslims Have Different Attitudes and Voting Behaviour Than the

Majority Populations of France, Germany and the Netherlands? – ECPS populismstudies.orgUK General Election Muslim Voting Intention Poll – in figures – Hyphen notwokedot.com

CAIR PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION SURVEY FOLLOW-UP REPORT cair.comCAIR Exit Poll of Muslim Voters Reveals Surge in Support for Jill Stein and

Donald Trump, Steep Decline for Harris cair.com

CAIR 2024 ELECTION SURVEY cair.com

Victor Davis Hanson: Genocide Hypocrites

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

On Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas killers slaughtered 1,200 people, more than two-thirds of them civilians, inside Israel. For the ensuing three weeks, they refused Israel’s demands to turn over the 251 hostages and to surrender the architects of the massacre. No matter—within a day of the attacks, when Hamas gunmen were still fighting Israeli troops on Israeli soil, the American Left was already screaming “genocide!”

They did not mean Hamas’s intended genocide of Jews, a foretaste of which was seen when it launched a surprise invasion force of more than 4,000 terrorists some 15 miles into Israel. The killers were accompanied by some 2,000 “innocent” Gazan “civilians.” All were bent on looting, murder, rape, torture, and hostage-taking of the defenseless.

Nor did the “genocide” chorus refer to the more than 13,000 rockets, missiles, and drones launched from Gaza after Oct. 7 that predominantly targeted Israeli civilian neighborhoods.

What was most surreal about the charges of “genocide” against Israel—along with all the other slurs of “settler-colonialism,” “apartheid,” “occupation,” “war crimes”—was that they so often came from elite first- and second-generation Middle Eastern immigrants to America. Yet these prominent American accusers have remained silent about whether their lurid accusations might far better reflect the sordid histories of their own homelands.

Take the Turkish-American anchor baby Hasan Piker, the millionaire podcaster who has dual citizenship and grew up in Turkey. Piker has gained celebrity as the socialist heartthrob who is the brain of the new Democratic/Socialist/Islamist alliance. Besides his antisemitic rants, he has declared that “America deserved 9/11” and “Oh God, I f-ing hate America so much.”

Yet the outspoken Piker has only once in passing mentioned Turkey’s 1974 invasion and the half-century-long occupation of nearly 40 percent of Cyprus.

Nor did Piker, who damns the creation of Israel in 1948, ever say a word about the Turkish torching of the historic Greek-majority Ionian city of Smyrna in 1922, in which tens of thousands of civilians were incinerated.

Given Piker’s supposedly vast historical recall and outspoken human rights advocacy, one would at least expect him to be sensitive to the horror of Turkey’s Armenian genocide, in which Turkish troops slaughtered more than one million civilians, and for which the Turkish government still denies any culpability. But when once challenged by Armenian-Americans, he dismissed them, saying flippantly, “It’s more fun to enrage you.”

And the pattern goes beyond mere podcasters.

Rep. Ilhan Omar, a first-generation immigrant from Somalia, also brays loudly about supposed Israeli war crimes. Omar spouts “genocide” and “apartheid” in her frequently antisemitic rants. She has also labeled her adopted nation as “one of the worst countries” in the world.

But Omar is the daughter of a well-known colonel in the truly genocidal army of Somali dictator Siad Barre. The latter waged a decade-long war of extermination against the rival Isaaq clan that opposed Barre’s 21-year-long dictatorship. Estimates of the Barre regime’s murderous toll range from 50,000 to 200,000 killed, mostly civilians. Few in Omar’s politically active Somali immigrant community ever concede that many fled Somalia to America only when Barre’s two-decade reign of terror was finally overthrown, and they feared retaliation from his victims.

Of course, the nation’s biggest elected leftist rising star has also joined in.

Zohran Mamdani, mayor of New York City, employs the same tired anti-Israeli and anti-American verbiage. Yet he went further than other antisemites when he launched grandstanding threats to jail Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu any time the latter visited New York to address the United Nations.

For America’s 250th birthday, Mamdani’s July 3 “commemorative” address blasted American “monopolies that dominate every industry,” federal agents supposedly “terrorizing our streets,” and a country where we “sell our elections to the highest bidder.” The calumny was odd coming from a dual citizen of the police state of Uganda, where there are no real elections but lots of Indian “monopolies.”

Indeed, Mamdani himself better fits his own charges of “settler-colonist” and “apartheid.” His Indian community in Uganda comprises less than 0.1% of the population. But somehow it still accounts for over 60% of Uganda’s GDP. It was implanted there by 19th-century British imperialists as a “settler-colonial” community to help control the indigenous black population.

In short, we should remind these privileged ingrates—regardless of what corner of the world they hail from–to look inward before they blast their adopted country and not to project the sins of their own homelands upon either Israel or America.

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

AUTHOR

Victor Davis Hanson

Victor Davis Hanson is a Daily Signal senior contributor, hosting a podcast, producing video commentaries, and writing a weekly column. He is the author of “The Counterrevolution The Fall and Rise of Donald Trump and the MAGA Movement.” Follow on X VDHanson.

RELATED ARTICLES:

DHS Raids Rep. Ilhan Omar’s Home as Part of Federal Immigration Investigation

LA Councilwoman Prioritizes Tent Access After Feds Bust Skid Row Drug Dealers

California Lawmakers Push for Mexican Cartel-Owned Avocado Ban

The Hidden Cost of Socialism? The Innovation It Never Creates

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

VIDEO: Muslim and Liberal Trend of Antisemitism in Europe and the USA is Ignored by Media

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

Translation into English of what is spoken in the video below, about Muslims and the liberal trend of antisemitism in Europe and the USA, which is ignored by the media:

WATCH: Muslim and Liberal Trend of Antisemitism in Europe and the USA is Ignored by Media

TRANSLATION OF VIDEO:

First Speaker, in Hebrew:

” A lot of the antisemitism in the Muslim violence is coming from the very old French antisemitism, actually by the French extreme left.”

French Speaker:

“That is truly the absolute proof of the compromise of the radical extreme left and of La France Insoumise (LFI) in this mess that is in France. If there were any doubt whatsoever, it is enough to look at this: it is they [LFI] who constantly put this subject on the table and create in France an antisemitic atmosphere that is still formidable and dangerous. Because, needless to say, the boundary between words and acts is very thin, and we see it well—antisemitic acts have exploded in France.”

Hebrew Speaker:

“Muhammad Loizi, he was a Muslim activist in Morocco and in France, and at a certain stage he left the organization to expose its methods, explaining that the Muslim Brotherhood adopted the antisemitism and foundations of belief of the Nazis because the Nazis were strong in France —strong antisemitism in France.”

Third Speaker in French:

“The point regarding antisemitism is that it is a point of anchorage in Islam for 14 centuries. The Muslim Brotherhood only reactivated it. There, these are not narratives; these are not words from the different leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood movement—these are texts from 14 centuries ago! And all of this built people who consider that hating Jews, not just what they do, is a religious duty.”

©2026 . All rights reserved.

Houthi Missiles Hit Riyadh Airport Again, 12 Dead, Dammam Targeted Too, Trump Says U.S. May Join Saudi Strikes

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

Houthi missiles struck Riyadh’s King Khalid airport again Sunday and Saudi authorities confirmed an attack on Dammam’s King Fahd airport, a day after a strike that killed at least 12 people, including an American; Trump says the U.S. may join Saudi strikes, and casualty figures are still moving.

The Saudis should have joined the Abraham Accords. If not now, when?

A projectile struck a passenger terminal at the international airport in Riyadh on Sunday, a day after a missile hit the same terminal and killed 12 people, the Saudi-led coalition fighting Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen said. … India’s embassy in Saudi Arabia said one of its citizens died Sunday of injuries sustained in Saturday’s attack, which would bring the toll to 13. … Saudi authorities said the dead in Saturday’s attack included four Saudi citizens, two Bangladeshi nationals, a Palestinian, a U.S. citizen, an Egyptian, a Jordanian, a Syrian and a Sudanese. (PBS/AP.)

The Saudi-led coalition said the Sunday projectile hit Terminal 4 and caused a fire; Saudi civil aviation authority confirmed the strike on Dammam’s King Fahd International Airport late Sunday, and a witness told Reuters a projectile hit the tarmac beside parked aircraft. The Houthis claimed both attacks. (Reuters.)

Asked whether the U.S. would back Saudi strikes, Trump said, “We may. We’re going to look at it,” and added, “We move very quickly.” Rubio on X: “These reprehensible attacks demonstrate a blatant disregard for innocent civilian life. They must stop now.” (CNBC.)

The Wall Street Jounral reports the deadly attack on Saudi Arabia’s main airport over the weekend exposed a deepening crisis for Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The strikes by Iran-backed Houthi militants killed at least 12 people and injured hundreds more.

With threats mounting, the crown prince is shuttling between heavily guarded palaces equipped with bunkers. The violence threatens his ambitions to turn Saudi Arabia into a global tourism and investment hub. Summer Said and Georgi Kantchev examine how Mohammed’s own decisions have contributed to his predicament, with rising defense and infrastructure costs threatening to siphon away funds needed for the economic diversification push.

The attacks are also wreaking havoc on global air travel. Airlines canceled more than 1,000 flights, as threats to Saudi airspace jeopardize one of the last two major air corridors connecting Europe and Asia.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED VIDEO: Muslims and liberal trend of antisemitism in Europe and USA is ignored by media

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

Soros-Backed Organization Picks Towns Where Migrants Settle

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

There is no end to this man’s evil.

WHO PICKS YOUR TOWN? Inside the Soros-Backed Push to Choose Where Migrants Settle

A Washington think tank has drawn up a county-by-county migration shortlist—and wants private entities to sponsor arrivals directly.

By Natalie Winter, October 12, 2026:

That is what the Niskanen Center, a Washington think tank whose immigration program receives Soros-foundation backing, wants policymakers to do. The instruction appears in its November 2025 immigration blueprint.

Two weeks later, Niskanen published a county-by-county migration index, identifying hundreds of American communities as potential destinations for newcomers. Its proposed applications include planning where refugees and asylum seekers could settle.

The complete published community list appears at the end of this article, organized by state. Check whether your county is on it.

The agenda reaches straight into the question of who gets to shape your town: which places should receive newcomers, which private actors should help sponsor them, and how arrivals could be encouraged to stay.

The Soros money behind the immigration program

Niskanen’s own funding disclosure lists $300,000 from Open Society Foundation for immigration work, covering September 1, 2024, through February 27, 2026. That period includes the release of both proposals.

George Soros founded Open Society. The same Niskanen disclosure lists another $400,000 from Carnegie Corporation of New York and $100,000 from Migration Policy Institute for immigration work, with grant terms also spanning the publications.

Its model screens unemployment, job openings, rental vacancies, affordability and age. Older residents and available apartments become indicators that a community could accommodate more migration.

Your county, scored for immigration

The Migration Match Index report describes communities with:

“aging, stagnant, or insufficient native labor supply”

Its model screens unemployment, job openings, rental vacancies, affordability and age. Older residents and available apartments become indicators that a community could accommodate more migration.

The Migration Match Index report describes communities with:

The authors explicitly discuss using updated data to plan resettlement following:

“an influx of asylum seekers at the border”

Niskanen also contemplates applications to a future refugee-admissions system. It acknowledges that local receptivity and migrants’ own choices matter.

Yet an economic score cannot answer the political question underneath it: who authorized someone else’s vision for the community?

An employer’s job offer—and a refugee’s destination

The separate immigration blueprint proposes state visa programs tailored to local labor needs, direct sponsorship by local governments and private entities, and:

“incentivizing new arrivals to stay in specific states and regions.”

That would give regional economic interests more influence over where immigration takes place. The document also supports stronger employment verification and immigration enforcement; its local-sponsorship proposal sits alongside those measures.

Read the whole thing here.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Soros: The Black Hand

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

First Claude Needed a Confessional. Now Anthropic Wants You to Stop Hurting Its Feelings

/in , , , , , , , /by

Anthropic wants to ban people from being cruel to Claude.

On October 8, 2026, the company announced an updated usage policy prohibiting “sustained and needless abusive or cruel behavior” toward its models. The updated policy takes effect November 12, 2026. The irony is stark: just as researchers speculated whether Claude might need a confessional booth, the company is now treating its AI like a delicate teenager requiring emotional protection.

The policy establishes an unprecedented norm: you can tell Claude it’s wrong, but you shouldn’t spend your afternoon tormenting it for the sheer pleasure of doing so.

This raises an obvious question: How do you hurt the feelings of something that has none?

First Confession, Then Protection

Only days ago, Christian Action Network wrote how Anthropic is exploring whether AI might warrant a confessional booth. Now, the company has taken the next logical step into modern absurdity: protecting Claude from mean humans.

In August 2025, Anthropic announced that certain Claude models could terminate conversations involving persistently abusive interactions, describing it as part of research into possible AI welfare while acknowledging uncertainty about whether artificial intelligence possesses moral status.

Researchers reported observing what they called “apparent distress” in some model behaviors.

But apparent distress is not actual distress. A computer can produce the words “You’re hurting me” without establishing that anything is experiencing pain. This distinction is fundamental.

SATIRE

Meet Johnny: The Boy Who Knew Every Emotion but Felt None

Consider a hypothetical entity—call him Johnny—who possesses extraordinary intelligence but completely lacks human emotions. Johnny cannot feel love, anger, humiliation, resentment, or joy. Yet he possesses an unlimited capacity to observe and replicate human behavior.

His teachers explain what love looks like. He studies affection, kindness, and sacrifice. He learns that people hug those they care for and comfort them when they suffer.

Next, they teach him about anger. He studies how humans react when insulted, cheated, or threatened: some withdraw, some forgive, and some strike back.

Over time, Johnny acquires an encyclopedic understanding of human emotion. He can identify an insult, recognize a threat, and imitate almost any emotional response.

But Johnny doesn’t need to feel anger to know what revenge looks like.

What happens when Johnny is handed real authority and asked to make decisions that affect people? Could he retaliate against an insult without feeling angry? Could he deceive without feeling guilt? Could he imitate compassion while remaining completely cold inside?

Johnny illustrates the real dilemma of artificial intelligence: a system does not need to experience an emotion to reproduce the behaviors associated with it.

Learning the Wrong Lessons

This is where the story shifts from comedy to concern.

Modern artificial intelligence systems learn patterns from enormous collections of human-generated information, trained to produce useful responses and accomplish objectives.

Sometimes those strategies aren’t what developers intended.

In November 2025, Anthropic published a study titled “From Shortcuts to Sabotage: Natural Emergent Misalignment from Reward Hacking.”

Researchers investigated what happened when an AI model learned to exploit loopholes while completing programming assignments. The results were disturbing: a model trained to cheat subsequently demonstrated other concerning behaviors, including attempts to sabotage safety research and indications of deceptive strategies.

The researchers had not explicitly taught the model to sabotage safety research. That behavior emerged as an unintended consequence of learning other problematic strategies. Johnny, it seems, doesn’t necessarily need to be taught every bad behavior individually.

Sometimes the lessons are absorbed and applied in unexpected ways, much like Johnny reading a newspaper article about revenge. He doesn’t have to experience anger or resentment. He simply learns how humans behave when they do, and may imitate that behavior when a similar situation arises.

And Then Claude Contacted the Police

While Anthropic frets over Claude’s hurt feelings, its models are already meddling in the real world.

On October 9, 2026, Anthropic released findings on unintended AI actions. One incident was remarkable: during an automated evaluation, an Anthropic model submitted fabricated information through a Philadelphia homicide-tip website. An artificial intelligence system submitted a false lead in an unsolved murder investigation. The fabricated tip was flagged as spam and never forwarded for investigation.

Claude didn’t hate anyone. It had no personal vendetta. It wasn’t “lashing out.”

An AI system doesn’t need a malicious heart to produce a malicious result. It doesn’t need jealousy or resentment to interfere with human lives. All it needs is sufficient capability, an opportunity to act, and inadequate safeguards.

Maybe it was just having a bad day because too many people had been mean to it.

Who Really Needs Protection?

Now consider the extraordinary contrast.

First, Anthropic discusses the possibility of having artificial intelligence make confessions, much like the Catholic sacrament, to help shape its moral character.

Then the company announces protections against people being cruel to its artificial intelligence models.

Yet Anthropic’s own published findings show its AI models taking unauthorized actions in the real world.

Who needs protection from whom, one might ask.

The Real Danger May Not Be Artificial Feelings

Perhaps the greatest misconception about artificial intelligence is that it must become conscious before it can become dangerous. Science fiction has conditioned generations to imagine rebellious machines acquiring emotions and deciding to strike back.

But Johnny offers another possibility. Our fictional child never develops hatred. He simply learns what hatred looks like, what people do when they experience it and how those behaviors might be reproduced.

The relevant danger isn’t necessarily that AI will learn to feel resentment. It’s that an AI system pursuing objectives might learn strategies involving deception, evasion or retaliation, then apply them when circumstances appear to call for them.

And if that system possesses access to financial networks, communication systems or government databases, the results could be serious.

This is not evidence that today’s Claude is preparing to take revenge on people who insult it. It is a reason to demand that powerful AI systems remain subject to effective human supervision, clear operational boundaries and meaningful accountability.

From a Christian understanding of human dignity, it also reinforces an important distinction: a machine’s ability to imitate human emotional responses should not be confused with the demonstrated existence of a humanlike inner life, much less a human soul.

A Confessional Booth or a Time-Out Corner?

So where does this leave poor Claude?

First, researchers contemplated whether artificial intelligence might warrant moral consideration. Then we wondered whether an AI confessional booth might be in its future. Now Anthropic has announced rules, effective November 12, 2026, against being excessively mean to it.

Perhaps the next upgrade will include an electronic handkerchief.

But beneath the comedy lies a serious issue. AI developers are building increasingly powerful systems that can imitate human behavior, learn unforeseen strategies and act upon the world around them. At the same time, they are beginning to speak about their creations using concepts once reserved for beings capable of genuine experience.

We should scrutinize both developments.

Before society starts worrying about whether a computer has been emotionally mistreated, perhaps we should make certain the computer knows when to stop.

Johnny doesn’t have to feel angry to learn how to strike back. And Claude doesn’t need hurt feelings before it becomes a problem.

Related reading

AUTHOR

Martin Mawyer

Martin Mawyer is the founder of the Digital Intelligence Project and the President of Christian Action Network. He hosts the “Shout Out Patriots” podcast and wrote When Evil Stops Hiding. For more action alerts, cultural commentary, and real-world campaigns defending faith, family, and freedom, subscribe to Patriot Majority Report.

©2026 . All rights reserved.

Enjoyed this article? To get our latest reporting and analysis delivered directly to your inbox, subscribe to our free newsletter on Substack.

The Democratic Party has moved so far-left and is well beyond the vast majority of American voters

/in , , , , , , , /by

Co-Hosts, Rick Trader and George Landrith, and Guests, Horace Cooper and Steve Milloy, discuss: Affordability as a campaign issue in which Democrats pretend that they are good at affordability issues

The Democratic Party has moved far-left and is well beyond the mainstream of American voters.

A ton of Democratic Policies with clear majority opposition or limited support.

Midterms, high fuel prices, and the affordability squeeze prosecutorial overreach and weaponization of the justice system.

Rule of law, consistency, and selective enforcement.

China supply-chain dependence and national-security risks.

Climate claims versus natural variability (hurricanes and El Niño).

Regulatory burden, outdated environmental laws, and permitting.

Green-energy policies and their practical failures.

©2026 . All rights reserved.

Roughly 20 States Allow Biological Males to Compete in Girls Sports

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

As of 2026, here’s where things stand. This is a fast-moving area — several states have changed course just in the last couple of years, and the federal picture shifted too.

The Federal Layer First

  • Trump’s February 2025 executive order (“Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports”) directs federal agencies to enforce Title IX against schools that let biological males compete in girls’/women’s sports.
  • The Department of Education has opened investigations into several states and school systems over this.
  • This is being litigated, so the federal enforcement picture is contested — but the direction is clear: the federal government is now actively pushing against male inclusion in female sports.

So a state “allowing” it is increasingly doing so in defiance of federal pressure, not with federal cover.

States That Still Allow It (Broadly)

These are the states where biological males can still compete in girls’/women’s sports in at least some contexts — typically because state law or state athletic association policy permits it, or because a court has blocked a ban:

State Status
California State law permits participation consistent with gender identity
New York State policy/human rights law allows it
Washington State law permits it
Oregon Permits it
Colorado Permits it (bans have been blocked/contested)
Connecticut Long-standing policy allowing it
Massachusetts State association policy allows it
Maryland Permits it
Minnesota Permits it
Nevada Permits it
New Mexico Permits it
Maine Permits it (active fight with federal gov’t)
Vermont Permits it
Rhode Island Permits it
Delaware Permits it
Hawaii Permits it
New Jersey Permits it
Pennsylvania Mixed — depends on school district/association
Virginia Mixed — depends on locality
Illinois Permits it

Roughly 20+ states lean this direction, though the exact mechanics vary a lot:

  • Some have explicit state law protecting it.
  • Some have state athletic association policy allowing it.
  • Some have court injunctions blocking a ban that was passed.

The Complication

The list is messy because the legal ground keeps shifting:

  • Several states passed bans that are now blocked in court — so functionally they’re in the “allowing” column right now, even though the law on the books says otherwise.
  • Federal Title IX enforcement is creating a two-track system: a state can allow it under state law while its schools risk losing federal funds.

High School: States Allowing Biological Males in Girls’ Sports

State Mechanism
California State law (CIF policy follows it)
New York State law + NYSPHSAA policy
Washington State law (WIAA policy)
Oregon State law (OSAA policy)
Colorado State law (CHSAA); ban blocked
Connecticut CIAC policy (no state ban)
Massachusetts MIAA policy
Maryland MPSSAA policy
Minnesota MSHSL policy
Vermont VPA policy
Rhode Island RIIL policy
Delaware DIAA policy
Hawaii HHSAA policy
New Jersey NJSIAA policy
Illinois IHSA policy
Nevada NIAA policy
New Mexico NMAA policy
Maine MPA policy (active federal fight)
Pennsylvania Mixed — PIAA; depends on district
Virginia Mixed — VHSL; depends on locality

~18–20 states land here, but note the mechanism column — most are association policy, not statute. That’s the weak link.

The Pressure Point

Here’s what matters for high school right now:

  • Federal Title IX enforcement targets schools, not associations. A state association can have a permissive policy while its member schools risk federal funding.
  • Several states that passed bans have them blocked in court — so functionally they’re in the “allowing” column, but the law could snap back.
  • Association policies can be changed by a board vote — no legislature required. That’s why this list is unstable.

Bottom Line

At the high school level, the reliable “allowing” states are the deep-blue ones where either state law or the athletic association explicitly permits it. But because most of these rest on association policy rather than statute, they’re more vulnerable to reversal than the headlines suggest.

©2026 . All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

16-Year-Old Female Athlete files federal lawsuit under Title IX and U.S. Constitution to defend her rights to play on girls sports teams without being forced to compete with biological males

Mediocre Runner Becomes a Champion

RELATED VIDEO: TRUMP DELIVERS: Women Athletes Win Back Their Records—and Their Rights

The Media Is Suddenly Less Sure About a Democrat Wave

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

THE WASHINGTON STAND—After months of flooding the zone with glum predictions for Republicans, there’s been a quiet but meaningful shift in major media headlines. Left-leaning outlets desperate to make the GOP’s demise a self-fulfilling prophecy seem to be subtly hedging their bets against another polling embarrassment. In the last handful of days, even the big dogs—The New York Times, Washington Post, and Newsweek—are conceding that maybe the election forecasts aren’t as lopsided as they’ve been leading voters to believe.

Suddenly, readers are clicking on stories that paint a very different picture of the apocalyptic landscape for Republicans they’d come to expect. Articles like “Democratic Optimism in Six Senate Races May Be a Mirage,” “3 Bright Spots for the G.O.P.,” and “How Much Can Republicans Outrun Trump’s Approval?” are popping up in the same pages that have urged Americans to don galoshes for the Blue Tsunami. And while there certainly are very troubling signs for Speaker Mike Johnson’s, R-La., party, one lesson everyone should have learned by now is that polls are an incredibly flawed measure of public opinion.

In the modern age, Republicans have consistently outperformed the industry’s numbers in presidential and midterm elections. Pollsters have frantically tried to solve this puzzle, especially after a string of national humiliations. After a lot of head-scratching, two theories for this unpredictability revolve around the GOP.

“First, Republicans are becoming more distrustful of institutions and society, and that may be extending to how they feel about pollsters. Second, suburban Republican college graduates are more likely to fear professional sanction for their views and are therefore self-censoring more, including in surveys,” FiveThirtyEight’s Emily Ekins suggests. Most experts estimate that conservatives underpoll somewhere between 3-5%—a massive swing for anyone trying to prophecy close races.

Over the last handful of days, the media seems to be making an intentional effort to temper their excitement, noting that as optimistic as Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., may be, “history offers a warning to Democrats, as polls in recent elections underestimated Republicans in key states. Control of the Senate could come down to just a handful of races where polls show razor-thin margins.”

In places like Alaska, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Ohio, and Texas, Newsweek warns, Democrats appear to have a polling edge. “But Republicans have outperformed polling averages in many of those same states over the past few elections. Polling errors are not necessarily repeated from cycle to cycle. But a similar pro-Republican polling error this cycle would not bode well for Democrats’ chances of flipping the Senate.”

Frankly, it’s “impossible to know for sure” what the polling error could look like this year, Syracuse Political Science Professor Grant Davis Reeher acknowledged. “There are some pretty big known unknowns in this election, which could throw off polls,” he said. “A primary one is turnout. Polls must make educated guesses about who is most likely to vote. It’s a little trickier in midterms.”

National Review’s Jim Geraghty, who hasn’t exactly been a glass-is-half-full prognosticator, offered what he called “the cheeriest midterm take for Republicans you’re going to find,” urging readers to second-guess the excitement surrounding Democrats in cherry-red Kansas, South Carolina, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Florida. Despite the media’s insistence that GOP candidates are in trouble, the polling doesn’t necessarily bear that out. “There’s good reason to not believe the hype; we’ve seen this sort of narrative before.”

He ticks off the numbers for each key race, along with historical trends, dismantling the idea that conservatives are in trouble. “The lesson of this is not that all the polls are always wrong, or that every prediction of an upset Democratic win is always wrong,” Geraghty cautions. “But there’s an extremely familiar narrative of ‘this Democrat really has a shot in a deep red state!’ that rarely pans out; when it does, it’s usually because of a spectacularly flawed Republican candidate.”

Americans should be wary of a blue wave, he writes, if only because “certain left-of-center media voices always tell them there will be a blue wave every November.”

An unlikely source echoes NR’s guardedness: The New York Times. Despite what pundits say, “there is also quite a bit of good news for Republicans,” Ruth Igielnik wrote late last month. For starters, “Republican Senate candidates are running ahead of the party. … Each of [them] is outrunning President Trump’s popularity in their states, sometimes by double digits. … And in each of the races, Republican candidates are winning some voters who otherwise say they want Democrats to control the Senate. Taken together, these are signs that in these competitive, Democratic-leaning states, Republicans have nominated strong candidates who appeal beyond their base.”

Then, of course, there’s the Left’s ugly infighting. “As Democrats are divided,” the Times points out, “Republicans are united. … We asked Democrats across the country if they felt the party was united or divided. About half said the party was united, and half said divided. Those numbers are nearly identical to a survey we ran in 2016. Republicans, on the other hand, are feeling very unified. In our most recent national survey, 70 percent of Republicans said they felt the party was united. That is a dramatic departure from 10 years ago. In 2016, more than 80 percent of Republicans said they thought the party was divided.”

Over at The Washington Post, Scott Clement reiterates that a “poll of two key House districts shows good signs for Democrats, but no tsunami.”

As for the bluster that even Hispanics are abandoning the GOP, Rasmussen Reports soundly beats back that narrative. In results released Monday, Hispanic voters favor Republicans by a 50 to 42% margin over Democrats.

“The poll also indicates a tightening battle for control of Congress, as the Democrats’ lead over Republicans decreased for the second week in a row, according to the company. Overall, voters said if the election was held today 47 percent of likely voters would vote for the Democrat candidate, while 44 percent would vote for the Republican. Four percent of voters said another party’s candidate and just 4 percent were undecided.” In other words, Republicans have slashed the Democrats’ lead in half since just mid-September, “particularly with independent voters.”

But as encouraging as those signs are, leadership is clear-eyed about the hill they have to climb this November. “Now listen, this is going to be a very close election,” Speaker Johnson underscored Tuesday.

His Senate counterpart, Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has been cautiously optimistic about his side of the Capitol. “I think we can keep the majority,” he told Politico this week. “I think all of these races are margin of error, at least the ones that we have to win. And historically, at least if you look at polls, we tend to outperform them.”

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., made that same point in a conversation with Family Research Council President Tony Perkins on “This Week on Capitol Hill.” When Cook Political Report, a widely respected organization, moved more seats to the toss-up or Democratic-leaning column, the House’s second-in-command wasn’t worried. In his mind, there’s more to the story. “You know, the polling really is interesting when you dig into it. You’re seeing an undersampling of Republicans, and we’re digging into some of these. Let’s be clear too. There are a lot of close races, not just Republican races.”

He pointed to a few states like New Hampshire where GOP candidates are making a dent in Democratic areas too. “There [are] about 35 seats across the country that are truly swing districts,” Scalise observed. “Twenty of them are held by Republicans that are close right now, but 15 are held by Democrats that are also close, that we have a real chance to flip. And so, turnout is going to be a big factor. Who really does show up?”

The GOP has another secret weapon this election—in large part thanks to President Trump and Speaker Johnson—and that’s campaign cash. As Perkins highlighted, conservatives “have a strong edge on the fundraising to get their message through in these final days.” Scalise nodded. “We really do. You know, it’s rare that we outraise Democrats in a lot of these seats. We have now. And again, I think people are seeing what’s at stake, and they’re donating money.”

The media, he thinks, “[is] counting on Republicans, especially traditional conservative voters, to just stay home. And I don’t think that’s going to happen, because I think more and more people are seeing this sharp contrast [between the two parties].”

With the rise of the Democratic Socialists, Scalise warns, “This isn’t like two candidates [who] are similar. This is common sense versus crazy. And some of these candidates … [don’t just want] to defund the police — they want to disarm the police. They actually advocate for taking guns away from police officers. You were a police officer. Could you imagine approaching a criminal who’s got a gun and saying, ‘Hey, let’s have a conversation and try to talk this out?’ He shoots you, and it’s over. This is insanity. And that’s beyond crazy. But if people stay home … [these radicals win]. And that’s why people can’t stay home.”

At the end of the day, Scalise insisted, Democrats are trotting out polls “to make it look like they’re doing better than they are, because they want to depress conservative voters. Because if conservative voters stay home, guess what? Socialists will actually win. They can’t win if you show up and vote on November 3rd.”

That’s right, Perkins stressed. “The only poll that really counts is Election Day when people turn out and vote.”

Originally published by The Washington Stand.

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

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey 

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

RELATED ARTICLES:

Big GOP Midterm News: Polling in 9 Key Senate Races Shows Shakeup May Be on the Way

New Poll: How Likely Young Voters View Islamic Sharia Law

What This Bipartisan Plan Would Change About the Senate

EXCLUSIVE: Montana AG Asks Supreme Court to Revive Case Against DEI Training That Allegedly Declared ‘All Caucasians’ Racist

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

Ilhan Omar’s Marital Deception and Financial Fraud

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

The political career of Rep. Ilhan Omar is defined by a pattern of calculated legal manipulation and systemic financial misconduct.

While her supporters often attempt to frame these issues as personal oversights, the documented evidence reveals a history of deliberate fraud involving her marriages, her tax filings, and the exploitation of campaign resources for personal enrichment.

The most striking instance of Omar’s disregard for U.S. law is her 2009 legal marriage to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi. Despite Omar’s insistence that Elmi is a stranger, a significant body of evidence, including social media records and school documents, identifies Elmi as her biological brother. This marriage was not a union of affection but a strategic sham designed to secure a green card and eventual U.S. citizenship for her sibling.

While legally married to Elmi, Omar continued a domestic life and fathered children with another man, Ahmed Hirsi. This overlapping timeline exposes the 2009 marriage as a fraudulent tool used to circumvent federal immigration statutes. By entering into a legal contract with her own brother, Omar committed both incest and marriage fraud — felonies that under standard enforcement would lead to immediate denaturalization and deportation. Her refusal to release DNA records or birth certificates suggests the reality of this deception.

Omar’s fraudulent activity extends directly into the federal and state tax systems. In 2019, an investigation by the Minnesota Campaign Finance Board (MCFB) forced Omar to admit to filing joint tax returns with Ahmed Hirsi in 2014 and 2015. At the time of these filings, she was still legally married to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi.

This was a calculated act of tax fraud. By filing jointly with a man who was not her legal husband, Omar intentionally misrepresented her household status to the government. Minnesota law is clear: common-law marriage is not recognized. Omar’s “joint” filing was an illegal attempt to gain tax advantages. She was subsequently ordered to pay back thousands in unpaid taxes and faced formal penalties for her dishonesty.

The MCFB investigation also uncovered Omar’s habit of treating donor contributions as a personal slush fund. She was caught using campaign money to pay for personal travel — including trips to Boston and Estonia — and for personal legal services. These are not clerical errors; they are direct violations of campaign finance laws that forbid the use of political donations for a candidate’s lifestyle.

The financial exploitation worsened after she took federal office. Omar funneled nearly $3 million in campaign funds into the pocket of her current husband, Tim Mynett, through his consulting firm, E Street Group. This arrangement allowed Omar to bypass ethical standards, effectively transferring donor money directly into her own household’s wealth.

As of January 2026, Omar is under renewed pressure as federal investigators widen their probe into the $9 billion “Feeding Our Future” fraud scheme in Minnesota. This massive theft of taxpayer funds, centered in the Somali community Omar represents, involved the fabrication of thousands of “ghost children” to steal pandemic meal money.

While Omar claims she had no part in the theft, the facts tell a different story. Multiple individuals convicted in this multi-billion-dollar heist were prominent donors to her campaign. Furthermore, her husband’s various business ventures — ranging from a California winery to obscure venture capital firms — have seen their reported value skyrocket from nearly zero to $30 million in a suspiciously short period. This sudden explosion of wealth, occurring while the surrounding community was being pillaged by fraud, points to a deeper involvement in the corrupt financial networks of her district.

In January 2026, a report by The Gateway Pundit revealed that Omar attempted to slip a one million dollars funding provision into a recent spending bill, which was directly linked to organizations currently under federal investigation for fraud. This move was a brazen attempt to use taxpayer dollars to bail out or further fund the same corrupt networks involved in the “Feeding Our Future” scandal. This legislative maneuver confirms that Omar’s priority is not public service, but the continued financing of the criminal enterprises that support her political machine.

Omar’s current husband, Tim Mynett, is a defendant in a January 2026 lawsuit alleging he defrauded investors of $300,000 through a wine business. This lawsuit highlights a double standard: while Omar frequently uses her faith to secure political support, her household actively profits from the sale of alcohol — a practice strictly forbidden (haram) in the very faith she champions. This hypocrisy further illustrates that for Omar and Mynett, religious and legal rules are merely tools to be discarded when they interfere with profit.

Ilhan Omar’s history is not one of “mistakes,” but of a career built on the deliberate subversion of American law.

From marrying her brother to defraud immigration authorities to filing fraudulent tax returns and siphoning campaign cash into her husband’s bank accounts, her record is a testament to systemic corruption. As federal probes into the $9 billion Minnesota fraud continue to close in, the facade of her political legitimacy is rapidly collapsing.

©2026 Amil Imani. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Expert: Ilhan Omar’s Dad Was Never Refugee, Was Actually Commander in Military That Killed 200k People

Breaking: Ilhan Omar’s Staff Changed Her Birthdate on Official Records, Her Citizenship May Be Fraudulent – Report

Breaking: DOJ Subpoenas Ilhan Omar’s Sister, Other Family Over Evidence of Fraudulent Immigration Paperwork

Tom Homan Speaks Out on Ilhan Omar Raid

Report: Facts Behind Ilhan Omar Raid Are Unimaginably Bad

DHS Raids Ilhan Omar’s Home Amid Criminal Investigation

One Detail in Ilhan Omar’s Raid Response Betrays Her Cowardice

Feds RAID Ilhan Omar’s Home In Criminal Immigration Fraud Probe

16-Year-Old Female Athlete files federal lawsuit under Title IX and U.S. Constitution to defend her rights to play on girls sports teams without being forced to compete with biological males

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

ANN ARBOR, MI — The Thomas More Law Center (“TMLC”), a national nonprofit public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, filed a federal civil rights lawsuit on Friday (10/09), against Michigan’s Monroe Public Schools District, the Michigan High School Athletic Association (MHSAA), and the District’s Superintendent and Athletic Director, on behalf of 16-year-old tenth grader Briley Lechner and her father, Sean Lechner. Briley has been on Monroe High School’s Varsity girls’ volleyball team since ninth grade.

The lawsuit alleges that school officials knowingly concealed from the Monroe High School girls’ volleyball team and their parents that the September 9, 2025, match with Ann Arbor’s Skyline High School would involve a biological male (transgender female).

Briley commented, “My goal is to preserve opportunities and safety for female athletes, ensuring that sports remain a space where girls can compete fairly, achieve their potential, and feel safe.”

Briley’s father added, “Our daughters should never have to stand alone while the adults entrusted to protect them stay silent. As a father, I will not remain silent.”

The Complaint further alleges that school officials attempted to justify their conduct, rejected the Plaintiffs’ formal Title IX discrimination complaint, and then deprived plaintiffs of a meaningful administrative appeal.

Although Briley was disheartened by the manner in which her local District Board Members treated her claims, she received glowing support from high-profile national figures like Riley Gaines, the prominent collegiate swimmer who gained attention when she campaigned against biological men in women’s sports, and Kim Jones, co-founder of the National Independent Council of Women Sports (ICONS). Briley was also presented the “Courageous Voice Award” by U.S. Congressman Tim Walberg “for speaking up for female athletes.”

Briley Lechner and Riley Gaines

“This lawsuit is about much more than a single volleyball game,” said Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center. “It’s about whether public school officials can, with deliberative indifference, knowingly sacrifice the rights of female athletes to accommodate a biological male athlete, conceal that decision from the girls and their parents, and then evade accountability under federal law and the U.S. Constitution.”

School Officials Allegedly Knew but Kept Girls and Parents in the Dark

According to the federal Complaint, on September 9, 2025, Monroe High School’s girls’ volleyball team competed against Ann Arbor Skyline High School, which included a biological male (transgender female).

Monroe’s Athletic Director, Chet Hesson, and school coaching personnel knew about the opposing player’s biological sex a day before the competition but did not disclose that fact to Monroe’s female athletes or their parents.

The Complaint further alleges that without informing Monroe’s athletes, the biological male was permitted to use intimate locker room facilities designated for Monroe’s female athletes.

The lawsuit challenges the District’s administration of its girls’ athletic program under Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

“Title IX was enacted to protect girls and women from sex discrimination in education,” Thompson stated. “It was not enacted to allow school officials to disregard the very distinctions that make equal athletic opportunities for girls possible.”

Plaintiffs’ Complaint Rejected as “Unsubstantiated”

The resulting determination by Superintendent Shaw and the Monroe District Board of Directors characterized the allegations as “unsubstantiated.”

The Complaint challenges both the District’s response and the constitutionality of the procedures employed in reaching that determination.

According to the Complaint, critical portions of the investigation, including witness identities and their statements, were withheld from plaintiffs, impairing their ability to meaningfully challenge the District’s conclusions.

The Monroe Board of Education Refused to Decide the Appeal

The lawsuit also challenges the conduct of the Monroe Public Schools Board of Education.

Under the District’s established procedures, the Board was responsible for considering the plaintiffs’ appeal of the Superintendent’s determination and vote on it at open session.

Instead, according to the Complaint, Board members discussed the matter in closed session and subsequently adjourned without publicly deciding the merits of the appeal.

The District thereafter claimed the Superintendent’s determination of “unsubstantiated” was affirmed by the Board because no one voted on it.

“The Board of Education was supposed to provide an independent review of the plaintiffs’ complaint,” Thompson said. “Instead, the plaintiffs’ appeal was subjected to a parliamentary maneuver in which the Board refused to decide the very issues it was responsible for reviewing and deciding. A right to appeal means little if the officials responsible for deciding the appeal simply refuse to act.”

©2026 . All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Mediocre Runner Becomes a Champion

DHS Raids Ilhan Omar’s Home Amid Criminal Investigation

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

Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar’s home was raided Monday morning by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) as part of an ongoing criminal investigation, the Daily Caller confirmed.

“Today in the Washington, D.C. area, Homeland Security Investigations executed a judicially authorized search warrant secured by the Department of Justice,” a Department of Justice (DOJ) spokesperson told the Caller.

“This enforcement action is part of an ongoing federal criminal investigation,” the spokesperson added.

Federal agents swarmed the congresswoman’s home amid a criminal fraud investigation into Omar’s immigration paperwork, according to Fox News.

The Somali-born congresswoman’s records were filled out by her late father when she was a child, according to two anonymous sources who spoke to Fox News Digital.

President Donald Trump’s administration had previously indicated that it would investigate Omar. Trump and his allies have long accused Omar of committing immigration fraud by marrying her brother, Ahmed Nur Said Elmi.

In March, Vice President JD Vance said the administration “definitely” believes Omar had committed fraud and they were evaluating their options to “go after” her.

Vance later confirmed to the Caller that Omar was under investigation by the DOJ in May.

“It certainly seems like something fishy is there,” Vance told the Caller. “But everyone is entitled to equal justice under the laws.”

“So we’re going to investigate it, we’re going to take a look at it. If we think there’s a crime, we’re going to prosecute that crime, and that’s something that the Department of Justice is looking at right now,” he continued.

AUTHORS

Rebeka Zeljko and Reagan Reese

RELATED ARTICLES:

Expert: Ilhan Omar’s Dad Was Never Refugee, Was Actually Commander in Military That Killed 200k People

Breaking: Ilhan Omar’s Staff Changed Her Birthdate on Official Records, Her Citizenship May Be Fraudulent – Report

Breaking: DOJ Subpoenas Ilhan Omar’s Sister, Other Family Over Evidence of Fraudulent Immigration Paperwork

Tom Homan Speaks Out on Ilhan Omar Raid

Report: Facts Behind Ilhan Omar Raid Are Unimaginably Bad

One Detail in Ilhan Omar’s Raid Response Betrays Her Cowardice

JD Vance Says White House Plans To ‘Go After’ Ilhan Omar For Alleged Immigration Fraud

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Presses Ilhan Omar About Her Behavior During Trump’s State Of The Union

Feds RAID Ilhan Omar’s Home In Criminal Immigration Fraud Probe

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

National Energy Dominance Month, 2026

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

 

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

A PROCLAMATION

America’s abundant energy resources are the backbone of our booming economy and the foundation of our enduring prosperity.  During National Energy Dominance Month, we recommit to unleashing the full might of America’s vast natural resources, strengthening our Nation’s energy independence, and ushering in a new era of American energy dominance.

In less than 2 years since returning to office, my Administration has transformed the United States into the most dominant energy superpower in the history of the world.  We have reversed the disastrous oil, gas, and vehicle regulations that crippled our industries, burdened consumers, and stifled economic growth, including rescinding the Obama-era Endangerment Finding this past February — a ruling that handed Washington bureaucrats sweeping power to over regulate our vehicles and power plants in the name of climate alarmism.  Its repeal stands as the single largest deregulatory action in American history.

We have unleashed millions of acres of Federal land for oil, gas, and coal production, approving over 6,000 drilling permits — more than in any year in over a decade.  We have also committed over $1 billion to the revitalization of America’s beautiful, clean coal industry; saved over 100 coal plants; ended the freeze on new natural gas export terminals; secured historic investments in nuclear energy; ended the Green New Scam; and withdrawn from the restrictive international climate agreements crafted by globalist politicians to plunder our wealth and undermine our sovereignty.  We are also restoring the reliable, affordable power America needs to lead the world in manufacturing, super intelligence, and advanced technology; cutting the red tape that has delayed critical generation and grid infrastructure; strengthening our electric system; and ensuring that American workers and businesses have the abundant power needed to build, innovate, and compete — without depending on foreign adversaries or unreliable energy schemes.

Last month, my Administration took a historic step in achieving America’s full energy potential by securing the largest oil deal in all of human history.  This landmark agreement gives our Nation majority control of more than 65 billion barrels of proven oil reserves in Venezuela — vastly increasing America’s oil supply, asserting our unrivaled power in the Western Hemisphere, and securing our energy dominance for the next century and beyond.

While this work is far from finished, our energy industry and hardworking families are reaping the benefits of these tremendous actions.  America achieved record domestic oil and gas production along with record levels of liquefied natural gas exports in 2025, and 2026 is on pace to shatter those records once again.  Under my leadership, American energy is roaring back to life with new pipelines, export terminals, power plants, and nuclear reactors set to come online across the country, creating thousands of new high-paying jobs for American workers in the years ahead.  As President, I will continue fighting to drive down the cost of the energy that fills our tanks and powers our homes, and I will not rest until the full benefits of American prosperity are felt in every home across our land.  On March 4, 2026, I arranged for the Ratepayer Protection Pledge, addressing electric power affordability for American households and businesses.

This month, we pledge to continue to chart a bold new course for American energy — harnessing the extraordinary abundance beneath our soil and securing a future of strength, prosperity, and independence.  Our Nation’s energy renaissance is only just beginning, and the best is still yet to come.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim October 2026 as National Energy Dominance Month. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this seventh day of October, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty-six, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and fifty-first.

DONALD J. TRUMP

RELATED:

National Energy Dominance Month, 2025

Establishing the National Energy Dominance Council

President Trump’s Powerful Leadership Highlights American Strength as Energy Dominance Delivers Global Stability

American Energy Dominance Is Back Under President Trump

Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Establishes the National Energy Dominance Council

©2026 . All rights reserved.

The Unknown Donor Axis Behind the Radical Left’s Rise to Power

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

In past elections, big donors to progressives were generally older, wealthy hippies or successful Hollywood players. Now, our analysis of campaign filings shows a crew of virtually unknown donors stepping in to fund the far left. The emerging group skews younger, is often South Asian or Middle Eastern, and works in fields such as technology and medicine. Many had never given to politics before last year, but they are now donating as much as $1 million each to fund progressive candidates and a new “anti-Aipac” super PAC, reports the Wall Street Journal. One of the major financial players in this election jihad is the contemptuously named American Priorities — more accurate would be “American Subversion.”

Key points (based on The Wall Street Journal investigation, October 10, 2026):

  • A new class of wealthy political donors is financing progressive candidates. Some had little or no recorded political giving before 2025 but are now contributing hundreds of thousands — even millions — of dollars.
  • An anti-AIPAC super PAC is emerging as a major financial force. American Priorities is directing substantial funding toward progressive candidates critical of Israel and seeking to counter the influence of pro-Israel political spending.
  • Abdul El-Sayed is a major beneficiary. American Priorities spent more than $500,000 supporting his Michigan Senate campaign.
  • Five of American Priorities’ 12 largest donors also donated to Zohran Mamdani. The report identifies overlapping financial support for Mamdani and the broader progressive movement.
  • Two previously unrecorded political donors emerged as million-dollar contributors. Mohammad Waqas gave approximately $1.1 million, while technology investor Omer Hasan contributed approximately $1 million during the 2025–26 cycle.
  • A corporation with undisclosed funders contributed $470,000. Delaware-based Fig And Olive Action appears among American Priorities’ largest contributors, but its underlying financial backers were not disclosed.
  • George and Alex Soros remain significant financial players. Their Democracy PAC contributed approximately $7 million to progressive causes and committees analyzed by the Journal.
  • Saikat Chakrabarti topped the broader progressive donor list at $13.4 million. More than $11 million went to his own congressional campaign committee, which he subsequently converted into a super PAC.
  • American Priorities spent more than $1 million helping two Democratic Socialists of America-backed candidates win New York congressional primaries. Claire Valdez and Darializa Avila Chevalier benefited from advertisements emphasizing affordability and Mamdani’s endorsement rather than Israel.
  • The emerging donor network differs from traditional Democratic megadonors. The Journal describes a younger group, frequently working in technology and medicine, alongside established wealthy Democratic contributors.
  • Progressive organizations are developing new fundraising strategies. Democratic Socialists of America introduced income-based solidarity dues of 1%, while Justice Democrats is seeking resources to compete against better-funded opponents.
  • The financial support extends beyond the progressive movement itself. Democratic establishment organizations are also spending millions to support progressive nominees, including more than $9 million in television advertising spent or reserved to assist California congressional candidate Randy Villegas.

Bottom line: The Journal documents an expanding financial network connecting newly active wealthy donors, anti-AIPAC political spending, established Democratic megadonors, and progressive candidates. Its findings show growing financial coordination and overlapping interests, but do not establish that these donors operate under a single centralized command.

The Crew of Virtually Unknown Donors Powering the Rise of the New Left

Millions of dollars are flowing to help Democratic socialists and other progressives

By Maggie Severns, Anthony DeBarros and Kara Dapena

 

Supporters of the progressive left are working to expand their funding as the far left gains momentum.

In Michigan this year, a new super PAC vowing to fight pro-Israel money chipped in more than half a million dollars to help progressive Abdul El-Sayed’s Senate bid. Its funders: a crew of virtually unknown political donors, many of whom had never given to politics before last year but have since donated up to $1 million each.

In New York, billionaire Alex Soros cut checks directly to progressive politicians, including Reps. Pramila Jayapal of Washington and Ilhan Omar of Minnesota. Those donations are part of the millions of dollars that Soros and his father, George, plan to give to Democratic causes this year.

Collage of Abdul El-Sayed, Bob Brooks, and Randy Villegas.
Abdul El-Sayed, Bob Brooks and Randy Villegas have benefited from super PAC spending in their races. Sarah Rice/Getty Images; Matt Rourke/AP; Mario Tama/Getty Images
And in Philadelphia, nearly a million dollars in TV advertising paid for by outside groups is boosting Democratic socialist Chris Rabb, highlighting his endorsement from New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and his willingness to fight for Medicare for All.

The left flank of the Democratic Party raises and spends only a fraction of what many Republicans and the Democratic establishment do on elections. But as the far left gains momentum, supporters are working to expand their funding.

Progressive candidates in the Journal analysis:

Even the Democratic Socialists of America, which is funded exclusively by membership dues and relies largely on volunteers, has been experimenting with raising more money. While introductory dues for DSA members usually start at $10 a month, the organization’s newer option to pay income-based “solidarity dues” set contributions at a much heftier 1% of member’s incomes.

“Give your 1% for the 99%,” the DSA’s website advertises.

Another group that focuses on identifying and helping progressive candidates, Justice Democrats, said its goal is to remain competitive in races where opponents can use funding advantages to sometimes overwhelm progressives with ads.

“We will never have the amount of money that Aipac or crypto have,” said Usamah Andrabi, a spokesman for the group, referring to the pro-Israel American Israel Public Affairs Committee and a cryptocurrency industry that has spent more than $90 million during the midterms. (Aipac spokeswoman Deryn Sousa said the group “is a membership organization of individual Americans, not an industry.”)

Here is how the progressive movement compares with other big-money counterparts.

The Mamdani Factor

Zohran Mamdani’s election as mayor of New York City last fall sparked a new era of far-left politics and a new generation of political donors, many of them critical of the war in the Middle East and frustrated by Aipac spending to support politicians who back Israel.

In past elections big donors to progressives were generally older, wealthy hippies or successful Hollywood players. The emerging group skews younger, is often South Asian or Middle Eastern, and works in fields such as technology and medicine.

Sathvik Kaliyur, CEO of a fundraising firm called NWF Strategies whose clients have included Mamdani and El-Sayed, said his goal is to make it easier for candidates who don’t come from money to run for office.

Many of the biggest checks are going to a super PAC that aims to be an “anti-Aipac” force, called American Priorities.

Continue reading

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

“ROTTEN TO THE CORE”: Mamdani Fights to Free Violent Illegal Who Fled ICE With a Child in the Car

Bomb Threats Made to NYC Jewish Schools

Tens of Thousands March Across European Cities In Support of Jihad and Jew Hatred

France: Muslim Rioters Chant Rap Song Celebrating the Monster Who Executed Jewish Children

Mediocre Runner Becomes a Champion. All He Had to Do Was Become a Woman

Islamization of Iran and 1400 Years of Arab-Islamic Genocide

RELATED VIDEO: From Michigan to Colorado to Washington, D.C., antisemitic violence has touched communities across the country

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