He’s one of the undisputed kings of comedy, and after Wednesday’s NBA Finals game, Jerry Seinfeld proved he subscribes to the adage that brevity is the soul of wit. When influencer FinesseFave caught up with Seinfeld and shoved a microphone in his face, he attempted to coax the sitcom legend into repeating his pro-Palestine rhetoric. As the New York Post reported, Seinfeld wasn’t having it: “What up, Seinfeld? What up? Can we get a ‘Free Palestine’?” said the streamer, FinesseFave, sticking a mic in the face of the Jewish actor and writer. The famously quick-on-his-feet stand-up responded with a laugh before shutting down the incendiary question in three words. “It doesn’t exist,” he said, before walking away. FinesseFave later shared the video with his 180k TikTok followers, along with the caption, “Clown hasn’t been relevant in decades anyway.” While plenty of anti-Israel activists slammed Seinfeld, many others applauded his willingness to speak up for his own beliefs: The Times of Israel noted that this wasn’t the first time Seinfeld has faced anti-Israel heckling, referencing this report from 2024: Performing in Australia, Jerry Seinfeld squares off with a pro-Palestinian heckler in the crowd. “We have a genius ladies and gentlemen. He’s solved the Middle East. He’s solved it! It’s the Jewish comedians, that’s who we have to get,” Seinfeld says to cheers as the heckler is escorted out crying “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free!” For an apolitical palate cleanser, here’s a more wholesome moment from the Game 4, with Seinfeld and his longtime collaborator Larry David celebrating the Knicks comeback win: This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.

Details are still coming in after initial reports that the Pentagon had been placed on lockdown after “sophisticated systems” detected a potential hazard. The Hill provided this statement: “The Pentagon has sophisticated systems to ensure the safety of the building and its occupants. Those systems have detected an air quality issue necessitating precautionary measures until we determine its significance. The Department is executing standard protection protocols, including a shelter-in-place order for the affected area,” Chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said in a statement to The Hill.  “Response teams are in place and ready to support building occupants,” Parnell said.  Social media alerts soon began to spread: Praying everyone is okay pic.twitter.com/eRThokZRZl — My moms caregiver (@mymomcare) June 11, 2026 Praying our people are safe — GeorgesLilsis (@here4USAnews) June 11, 2026 What hazardous materials could there be unless somebody is trying to do something stupid — US_Bandit4547 (@US_bandit732) June 11, 2026 The New York Post added these details: The Pentagon is on lockdown Thursday as emergency workers respond to the Department of War’s headquarters for a “hazardous materials incident,” Arlington County Fire and EMS said in a post to X. “ACFD units, including our Hazardous Materials Team, are currently operating at the Pentagon in support of PFPA’s Hazmat Team during a hazardous materials incident,” it said. Here’s the latest in this developing story: This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.

The United States Postal Service is finally addressing mail-in ballot fraud. A new USPS rule will require all states that use USPS delivery for mail-in ballots to hand over their state voter registration lists to the USPS. The USPS has proposed the new rule in order to abide by President Trump’s Executive Order 14399, which aims at ensuring integrity in general elections. CNN provided further details on the USPS’s newest proposal: State election officials could soon face a stark choice: Hand over voter lists to the Trump administration or risk losing Postal Service delivery for mail-in ballots. That dilemma stems from newly proposed USPS rules that seek to comply with an executive order President Donald Trump signed this spring to crack down on mail-in voting. If courts let the order stand, it would give the federal government an unprecedented role in elections — and could put even more voter data in the hands of Trump officials searching for supposed election fraud. The proposed rules lay out new conditions that states would have to meet to send ballots through the mail, including giving the agency lists of all voters set to receive mail ballots. So far, 23 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia are suing, as are Democratic Party leaders and non-partisan voter advocacy groups, setting up a potentially active summer of high-stakes judicial rulings. The Trump administration cleared an initial legal hurdle last month, when a federal judge in Washington, DC, who is overseeing one set of the cases, declined to block Trump’s executive order, allowing the Postal Service to begin implementing it. The Democratic Party groups are asking an appeals court to speed up its review of that decision, warning that voters around the country could be disenfranchised in this year’s midterm elections if the proposal is not blocked. In an interview with CNN, Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, a Democrat whose state is part of the coalition that filed a legal challenge in Boston, said that if courts rule for the Trump administration, “Then you will see a virtual elimination of mail-in voting, unless the states supply voter lists to the federal government.” The March 2026 executive order is one of several moves Trump has made recently to seek federal control over elections and restrict mail-in voting, which he has repeatedly cast as a tool used by his opponents for election cheating despite no evidence of widespread voter fraud. USPS just implemented rules from Trump’s March executive order: States must submit full mail-in & absentee voter lists with personalized barcodes for every ballot — or USPS will stop delivering them.This forces transparency in election mail. States that refuse to cooperate now… — Helen MAGA❤️ (@helengmaga) June 11, 2026 The White House released Trump’s EO 14399 that the USPS must abide by: By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (52 U.S.C. 20901 et seq.), the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (52 U.S.C. 20501 et seq.), and the Federal Government’s constitutional obligation to guarantee a republican form of Government to every State in the Union, U.S. Const. Art. IV, Sec. 4, it is hereby ordered: Section 1. Purpose and Policy. The right to vote in Federal elections is reserved exclusively for citizens of the United States under the Constitution and Federal law. Federal statutes explicitly prohibit non-citizens from registering to vote or voting in Federal elections and impose criminal penalties for violations. (18 U.S.C. 241; 18 U.S.C. 611; 18 U.S.C. 1015; and 52 U.S.C. 20511). The Social Security Administration (SSA) maintains records that, in conjunction with the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program under 42 U.S.C. 1320b-7, can assist in verifying identity and Federal election voter eligibility. The Federal Government has an unavoidable duty under Article II of the Constitution of the United States to enforce Federal law, which includes preventing violations of Federal criminal law and maintaining public confidence in election outcomes. To enhance election integrity via the United States Mail, additional measures are necessary. Secure ballot envelope identifiers provide a reliable, auditable mechanism to enforce Federal law without unduly burdening or infringing on the rights of eligible voters. Unique ballot envelope identifiers, such as bar codes, enable confirmation that only citizens receive and cast ballots, reducing the risk of fraud and protecting the integrity of Federal elections. Sec. 2. Establishment and Transmission of State Citizenship Lists and Prioritization of Investigations and Prosecutions Related to Election Fraud. (a) To the extent feasible and consistent with applicable law, including but not limited to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), the Secretary of Homeland Security, through the Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services and in coordination with the Commissioner of SSA, shall take appropriate action to compile and transmit to the chief election official of each State a list of individuals confirmed to be United States citizens who will be above the age of 18 at the time of an upcoming Federal election and who maintain a residence in the subject State (State Citizenship List). The State Citizenship List shall be derived from Federal citizenship and naturalization records, SSA records, SAVE data, and other relevant Federal databases. The State Citizenship List shall be updated and transmitted to State election officials no fewer than 60 days before each regularly scheduled Federal election, or promptly upon request by a State in connection with any special Federal election. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish procedures to (i) allow individuals to access their individual records as well as to update or correct them in advance of elections; and (ii) enable States to routinely supplement and provide suggested modifications or amendments to the State Citizenship List transmitted thereto. An individual’s identification on the State Citizenship List does not indicate that the individual has been properly registered to vote in the State. State and Federal laws and State procedures must still be followed for an individual to be registered to vote. There may be State laws, not reflected in the State Citizenship List, that preclude voter registration, or the individual may choose not to be registered. (b) For purposes of this order, an individual is “eligible to vote in a Federal election” if the individual is a citizen of the United States, 18 years of age or older by the date of the upcoming election, and otherwise qualified under the laws of his or her State. The Attorney General shall prioritize the investigation and, as appropriate, the prosecution of State and local officials or any others involved in the administration of Federal elections who issue Federal ballots to individuals not eligible to vote in a Federal election, including under 18 U.S.C. 2(a), 18 U.S.C. 241, 18 U.S.C. 371, 18 U.S.C. 611(a), 18 U.S.C. 1001, 18 U.S.C. 1015, 52 U.S.C. 10307, and 52 U.S.C. 20511. Similarly, the Attorney General shall prioritize the investigation and, as appropriate, the prosecution of individuals and public or private entities engaged in, or aiding and abetting, the printing, production, shipment, or distribution of ballots to individuals who are not eligible to vote in a Federal election. Sec. 3. United States Postal Service Rulemaking on Mail-In and Absentee Ballots. (a) The unlawful use of the mail in connection with elections is prohibited by various Federal statutes, including 18 U.S.C. 1341, 18 U.S.C. 1708, 52 U.S.C. 10307, and 52 U.S.C. 20511. (b) To ensure the faithful execution of Federal law, protect the integrity of the mail as a medium for transmitting Federal election ballots and establish uniform standards for mail-in or absentee ballot services implemented through the United States Postal Service (USPS), the Postmaster General is hereby directed to initiate a proposed rulemaking pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 401 and other applicable authority within 60 days of the date of this order. The notice of proposed rulemaking shall include, at minimum, the following: (i) Proposed provisions specifying that all outbound ballot mail must be mailed in an envelope that: (A) is marked as Official Election Mail, including through designated markings provided by USPS for this purpose, such as the Official Election Mail logo, as necessary and appropriate; (B) is automation-compatible and bears a unique Intelligent Mail barcode, or successor USPS technology, that facilitates tracking and is consistent with the other requirements of this section; and (C) has undergone a mail envelope design review by the USPS to ensure compliance with USPS mailing standards, including barcode placement. (ii) Proposed provisions specifying that, no fewer than 90 days prior to a Federal election, any State may choose to notify the USPS if it intends to allow for mail-in or absentee ballots to be transmitted by the USPS. As part of that notification, any notifying State should further indicate whether it intends to submit to the USPS, no fewer than 60 days before the election, a list of voters eligible to vote in a Federal election in such State to whom the State intends to provide a mail-in or absentee ballot to be transmitted via the USPS. (iii) Proposed provisions specifying that the USPS shall not transmit mail-in or absentee ballots from any individual unless those individuals have been enrolled on a State-specific list described in subsection (b)(iv) of this section with the USPS pursuant to this subsection. (iv) Proposed provisions specifying that the USPS shall provide each State with a list of individuals (Mail-In and Absentee Participation List) who are enrolled with the USPS, pursuant to a process specified in the rulemaking directed by this subsection, for mail-in or absentee ballots provided by such State, along with unique ballot envelope identifiers, such as bar codes, for mail-in or absentee ballots provided to such individuals. The preparation and transmission of each State-specific Mail-In and Absentee Participation List shall comply with the Privacy Act and all applicable use agreements. (v) Proposed procedures enabling each State to routinely supplement and provide suggested modifications or amendments to the State’s Mail-In and Absentee Participation List in advance of any Federal election, consistent with applicable State law. (c) The USPS shall coordinate with the USPS Office of Inspector General and the Department of Justice for investigation of suspected unlawful use of the mail involving Federal election materials. (d) Any final rule pursuant to this section shall be issued no later than 120 days from the date of this order. This is the progress voters have been waiting for. Now, the SAVE America Act must be passed next. This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.

When it comes to establishing an elite crew to pilot NASA’s next mission to low-earth orbit, some folks would apparently prioritize pronouns over qualifications. The four-person Artemis III mission happens to be made of all men, and the overabundance of Y chromosomes really triggered some social media users. As The Hill reported, NASA administrator Jared Isaacman wasn’t deterred: “I have seen reactions ranging from disappointment to outrage,” Isaacman wrote in a post on X, in response to complaints about the mission lacking female astronauts. “I have personally been to space twice with 50 percent female crews. My closest advisors and some of the smartest engineers I know are women…In a world with so much controversy, I hope this can be a moment where we celebrate the astronauts selected, respect the integrity of the process, and recognize the extraordinary depth of talent across the entire corps,” he added.  The NASA administrator said the Astronaut Office assigns the crew that gives the mission the “best chance” of meeting its objectives, noting that the background and expertise of astronauts are considered when making selections, with a focus on test-pilot experience, development work on specific programs and availability. Artemis III will carry out a series of objectives in low Earth orbit designed to demonstrate critical systems needed for future lunar landings, beginning with Artemis IV, according to NASA. Here’s his full statement:  Starting with some energy, and my inability to write brief updates, I am just extremely proud of the NASA crew, our industry, and our international partners. We are getting into a rhythm here at NASA. Earlier this year, setbacks put the Artemis II rocket back in the VAB for repairs, and we determined it was necessary to add another mission, Artemis III in 2027. Since then, we have unveiled the Ignition plans to build a Moon Base and nuclear-powered spaceships, launched a highly successful mission around the Moon, brought the crew home safely, and now watched the torch pass to Artemis III. There will be no shortage of major milestones to celebrate in the months ahead as we build the Moon Base and launch the Nancy Grace Roman telescope. I am beyond proud of the team and all the momentum and excitement around the space program. I do want to take this moment to address two of the questions I have been seeing since the crew announcement. Why are there no women assigned to Artemis III? I have seen reactions ranging from disappointment to outrage. I have personally been to space twice with 50% female crews. My closest advisors and some of the smartest engineers I know are women. In our latest NASA leadership organization, nearly 50% of the Center Directors and Mission Directorate leadership are women. The last astronaut candidate class selected under this Administration was majority female because they were the best of the best, including one astronaut I previously went to space with. In a world with so much controversy, I hope this can be a moment where we celebrate the astronauts selected, respect the integrity of the process, and recognize the extraordinary depth of talent across the entire corps. The crew selection does not involve any political appointees. The Astronaut Office assigns the crew that gives the mission the best chance of meeting its objectives, taking into account many factors, including the background and expertise of the astronauts, such as test pilot experience, development work on specific programs, and availability. For example, those raising this concern may not be aware of the pipeline of crews already preparing to launch to the Space Station, or those who have been undergoing lunar-specific training that would be a better fit for a future surface mission. The Artemis III astronauts are experienced, qualified, and deserve to be celebrated for the mission they have been assigned, just as the crews that follow will be celebrated when their time comes. We have an extraordinary astronaut corps, and every mission and every crew is part of a larger campaign to get America back to the Moon and to build the future we all dreamed about as children. What are the objectives for Artemis III if both landers will not be fully ready? Coming off a highly successful lunar mission like Artemis II, it is not surprising that the bar is set high for Artemis III. I think it is important to understand how difficult and dangerous it is to land astronauts on the Moon. We have not done it in a very long time, and we want to draw from a past playbook for success. That means getting into a cadence of launching, learning, and rolling improvements into the next mission. First and foremost, it is imperative for SLS to be flying with some frequency for operational currency and, honestly, safety. Earlier this year, it was very clear across NASA leadership that an additional mission was necessary in 2027. It is also imperative to gain interoperability data from rendezvous and docking with landers in Earth orbit. We do not need those landers that are still in development to be fully capable and certified for landing on the Moon on Artemis III, but we do need to test certain systems and controllability. Not to mention, we are moving quickly into a future where we do not require a single rocket to bring everything necessary for a mission to space, and as such, gaining experience with multi-launch campaigns and on-orbit assembly is directionally correct. The Blue Origin test lander for Artemis III will incorporate many of the most important systems and subsystems that have not previously been operated by the provider, including ECLSS in a crew cabin, and other avionics. With SpaceX, they have demonstrated many of those capabilities continuously on Crew Dragon, but other controllability tests are important based on the negative-X axis acceleration that will be necessary when Starship undertakes the TLI burn to the Moon with a docked Orion. After Artemis III, we will learn a lot and roll in further improvements, be that hardware, software, or procedural updates, as both providers undertake end-to-end uncrewed demonstrations to the surface in 2028, in advance of Artemis IV, where NASA astronauts will finally complete the grand return to the Moon. As I said in my remarks yesterday, when Gene Cernan left the lunar surface on Apollo 17, he said, “We leave as we came, and, God willing, we shall return, with peace and hope for all mankind.” We are returning, and we are doing so with the fire carried forward from Apollo, the lessons learned from Artemis II, the crew of Artemis III, and all those who will follow. NASA will send the very best crews for the right missions. If the composition of our astronaut corps and our latest class of candidates says anything, it is that we have exactly the talent required to get the job done. Godspeed Artemis III, and all those who will follow. Isaacman’s response received significant praise: Thank you for your professional and measured response. The time you take to communicate to the public is highly commendable and a very difficult task. Keep up the great work! I haven’t been this excited optimistic about space exploration for about 40 years. — Greg Langley (@Greg_Langley) June 11, 2026 NASA should always select the best astronauts for the mission, their type of reproductive system or the density of melanine in their skin shouldn't matter at all. — ᚨᚾᛞᚱᛖ ᛒᚢᛖ (@BueAndre) June 10, 2026 Even many of those who wanted to see a woman aboard the next mission could understand and accept the decision: Was I upset there wasn’t a woman named? Yes. Do I understand the crew choice? Yes Do I feel represented by this crew? Yes Representation is deeply personal & looks different to everyone- we want to see ourselves in the crews. I see myself in AIII just as much as I did in AII — Sophie Sanchez (@chitownchica) June 10, 2026 CBS News provided additional details about the crew: NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman introduced the crew members at a press event at the Johnson Space Center in Houston. They are: Commander Randy “Komrade” Bresnik Pilot Luca Parmitano Mission specialist Frank Rubio Mission specialist Andre Douglas Bob Hines was named the backup crew member. Bresnik, 58, is a former Marine fighter pilot and “TOPGUN” graduate who logged 149 days in space during a space shuttle flight in 2009 and a long-duration stay aboard the International Space Station in 2017.  Parmitano, 49, an astronaut with the European Space Agency, was the first Italian commander of the space station and an Italian air force test pilot. Douglas, 40, is a test engineer and Coast Guard reserve commander who will be making his first space flight on Artemis III. He served as a backup crew member for the recently completed Artemis II around-the-moon mission Rubio, 49, is an Army Black Hawk helicopter pilot and a family medicine physician. He spent a U.S. record 371 days in space aboard the ISS in 2022-23. Here’s some additional insight from Isaacman: This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.

President Trump just put Iran’s oil lifeline in the crosshairs. In a fresh June 11 warning, Trump said the United States would hit Iran “very hard tonight” and raised the prospect of taking Kharg Island, the key oil export hub off Iran’s coast. Fox News captured the breaking warning as it moved across the political world: BREAKING: President Trump says the U.S. will hit Iran ‘VERY HARD TONIGHT,’ claiming the regime’s Navy, Air Force, radar, air defenses and much of its offensive capability are completely “GONE.” Trump also floated taking Kharg Island and other oil infrastructure points, saying… pic.twitter.com/pwZhmrUgbC — Fox News (@FoxNews) June 11, 2026 The Kharg Island threat goes straight at the regime’s money machine. Kharg Island is widely described as Iran’s largest oil terminal and a central artery for the regime’s crude exports. The New York Post included these direct lines from Trump’s warning: “we will be taking Kharg Island” “VERY HARD TONIGHT.” The Post’s X post put the oil-export-hub angle front and center: Trump says US 'will be taking Kharg Island' oil export hub, vows to hit Iran 'very hard tonight' https://t.co/Q64v4fg627 pic.twitter.com/4J9UWLoyuv — New York Post (@nypost) June 11, 2026 Trump also told Fox News that taking Kharg Island has been his preference, while acknowledging the politics and military risk around such a move. The Associated Press added this caveat from the Fox interview: “My preference has always been to take Kharg Island,” “I don’t know that America has the stomach for it to be honest.” That distinction is important. Trump is threatening the regime’s oil lifeline, while stopping short of saying American troops are already moving onto the island. AP also noted the basic military danger: Kharg Island sits about 21 miles from the Iranian mainland, where missiles, drones, and artillery could put U.S. forces within range. CBS News explained why the island carries such strategic weight: Kharg has historically handled the overwhelming share of Iran’s crude exports, and disruption there would strike directly at Tehran’s oil revenue. For Tehran, the message is unmistakable. The pressure is shifting from military hardware to oil infrastructure, and that is where the regime’s power gets expensive fast. Iran has spent years betting that Washington would stop short of the targets that matter most. Trump is now saying those targets are on the table. This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.