California Governor Gavin Newsom’s “first partner” Jennifer Siebel Newsom is going viral after a video resurfaced in which she said she gives her sons dolls and changes male protagonists in books to female protagonists when reading to her children. The resurfaced conversation comes from a 2019 interview with the Los Angeles City Council President Nury Martinez honoring Women’s History Month.  “I’ve given our boys dolls … to learn that care and caregiving is not just an activity reserved for women but is also an activity that is a responsibility for men,” she said. Later in the interview, she added, “If I’m reading a book and the protagonist is a male, I just change the he to a she.” She said it normalizes women being the star of a story and that “women matter and women are interesting.” Her comments were quick to draw criticism from the Right. Conservative commentator Allie Beth Stuckey said, “Being a boy isn’t a disease that needs to be cured. Masculinity is a strength that needs to be fostered and encouraged.” Fox New’s Tomi Lahren added, “I told yall the other night on Watters PrimeTime as bad as Gavin is, the wife will be the woke weight on his ankles.” Popular commentator Link Lauren said, “I’e sounded the alarm for years. Jennifer is on eof the most radical women in public life. Imagine how she is behind closed doors if this is what she says publicly.” The Daily Wire obtained the interview in its entirety and found that in addition to her parental advice, Siebel Newsom said conservative politics conflict with viewing women as equal. “I grew up revering Ronald Reagan … my father did, so therefore we did,” she said. “My dad has always been the biggest champion of women, especially marginalized and vulnerable women, but unfortunately his politics led him in a direction that is sort of in conflict with seeing women as equal.” She also blames California’s K-shaped economy on the “devaluation of all that we’ve feminized.” “Everything that we’ve feminized in American culture — whether entire industries like education, health care, etc., or just attributes like empathy, care, and collaboration — because of the devaluation of all that we’ve feminized, we actually have this incredible inequitable system whereby socioeconomic mobility has never been as poor.” She added that “with California, for example, being the richest and poorest state in our country, we know that we have a lot of work to do to ensure that every California resident achieves not just the American dream, but the California dream.” Siebel Newsom concluded, saying this is a policy she’ll champion as “first partner” of California, a title she created, explaining that she sees it as a more inclusive alternative to the traditional title of “first lady.” It’s not the first time critics have questioned the first partner’s beliefs and word choices. Siebel Newsom even mentioned her husband has at times been a critic. “Every once in a while, he’ll [Governor Gavin Newsom] say, ‘That’s not really helpful that you said that,’ and I’m like, ‘I know, I’m sorry,’ but it’s the truth and I’m always going to speak the truth, and I’m always a mama and I always care about not just my children, but California’s children, and I’m always going to advocate for women.” CNN’s Scott Jennings has argued Siebel Newsom will be a problem for the governor of California if he chooses to run for president in 2028. Jennings made his remarks after Siebel Newsom discussed traveling to red states to learn about racism and misogyny.

War Secretary Pete Hegseth shook things up at the Pentagon during Holy Week when he fired several top generals — including Major General William Green Jr. the U.S. Army chief of chaplains. Green’s job as the Army chief of chaplains is to advise the Army Chief of Staff on issues of religion and morality, as well as to oversee the Army Chaplain Corps — and he was three years into what would normally be a four-year term when Hegseth removed him from the role. Green served as an enlisted soldier prior to becoming an ordained minister, and has served as a chaplain in the Army since the 1990s. His promotion to Major General was recent, according to Military.com, and he had become the Army chief of chaplains in 2023. While no official reason has been given for Green’s termination — marking the first time that an Army chief of chaplains has been fired since the position was created under the National Defense Act of 1920 — Hegseth had previously voiced his displeasure with Green’s Army Spiritual Fitness Guide, published in 2025. The 112-page guide — and accompanying Battle Book — featured “secular-inclusive” principles aimed at encouraging resilience and strength. It was written to be a part of the Army’s Holistic Health and Fitness program (H2F), for which development began in 2024 during former Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s tenure. The guide was published in August of 2025, and Hegseth disliked it so much that he ordered the War Department to scrap it entirely by December, less than six months after it was implemented. “It mentions God one time. That’s it. It mentions feelings 11 times. It even mentions playfulness, whatever that is, nine times,” Hegseth said at the time, complaining that in the military, “chaplains have been minimized, viewed by many as therapists instead of ministers.” The guide was summarily scrubbed from the Army’s website. Two other top generals were removed the same week: Gen. David Hodne, a former Army Ranger in charge of the Army’s Transformation and Training Command, and Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy A. George.

Officials in the nation’s capital will deploy birth control to try to get the city’s rodent population under control after years of failure. D.C. Health said on Wednesday they will start placing “fertility control bait” in targeted neighborhoods as part of a “blitz” targeting the rat population. At the same time, officials pleaded for Washington, D.C., residents to stop throwing food trash on the ground. “You have said that we need a more effective strategy, and so we have come up with a new strategy,” D.C. Health Director Ayanna Bennett said. The rat control program is predicted to cost around $130,000 and will focus on the Adams Morgan neighborhood first before expanding to the wider city. That part of town is known for its bars and international restaurants. “We’re gonna get the rat population down and then we’re gonna come back in three weeks to see if any of those babies survived and get them, too. But, they cannot stay down if they find anything to eat,” Bennett said. “So that means everybody cannot be throwing food on the ground. The mayor doesn’t like it and it’s helping the rats. We don’t want your trash to be outside of the bin, if at all possible.” D.C Health revealed more about the “targeted rodent control pilot” program, saying that it would improve public health in “areas experiencing high rodent impact.” The “three-pronged blitz” will include placing rat poison at rat burrows and “non-lethal rodent fertility control bait designed to reduce rodent reproduction over time.” “The blitz activities will occur in three-week cycles, where a team of inspectors will apply all three control methods and conduct frequent monitoring,” D.C. Health said. The rat blitz was welcomed by residents, who have long complained about the city’s inability to keep the rat population down. “They be in the dumpsters. They be running in groups, like, two, three — a few too many,” one local man told NBC News4. “Anything that they can do to help limit the rats I would probably be in favor of,” another man said. “I’ve never heard of it. I trust that the science is real. But if it is, the less rats in D.C. is a good thing.” Other cities like New York have tried similar strategies to control the rat population. “Two rats in a given year can reproduce 15,000 descendants,” New York City Councilmember Shaun Abreu said last year. “We have to go at the source.”

The following is an edited transcript excerpt from The Michael Knowles Show. * * * A huge proportion of babies born in the United States are now born to foreign nationals who are cheating the immigration system.  Can we acknowledge this whole “anchor baby” thing is a problem? I should hope so but I’m not totally sure that we can. The whole concept of birthright citizenship comes from the British. The idea stems from a distinction between jus soli — the right-of-the-soil — and jus sanguinis — the right-of-blood. The notion that you get your citizenship from the blood of your parents versus receiving citizenship because you were born on certain soil. Well, we get the idea from English common law. And guess what? The English — the Brits — have not had jus soli, right-of-the-soil birthright citizenship, since 1983. So even they recognized there’s a problem. Can we too recognize that there’s a problem here? Western Lensman gives some very good background on this topic on X, posting a clip about pregnant mothers from Turkey giving birth in the United States. Here’s the clip: 2020. Turkish anchor baby ring found operating in Long Island, NY — mothers got taxpayer funded healthcare. This is insane: “Prosecutors say more than 100 pregnant women from Turkey came here to give birth, so their children were instantly granted U.S. citizenship.”… https://t.co/mjxyihjeO2 pic.twitter.com/QcWl50rEXd — Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) April 2, 2026 Source: WesternLensman/X.com There are “anchor baby” operations — what amount to birth tourism schemes — that have been operating in this country for years. Prosecutors described a case on Long Island where more than 100 pregnant women from Turkey came to the U.S. to give birth so their children would automatically receive U.S. citizenship. The defendants fraudulently facilitated the births in the United States of approximately 119 Turkish children. And those children now hold birthright U.S. citizenship. Officials alleged the scheme was openly advertised abroad — essentially marketing the idea: if you want your child to be born in the United States and become an American citizen, this is how you do it. This is a business. This is an industry. You see versions of this in other countries too — there were similar cases involving Chinese birth tourism operations in the past. So, again I ask, can we acknowledge that this is a problem? Yes. Where does the problem derive from? It derives from what is now an outmoded conception from English common law — so much so that the English themselves moved away from it — and from interpretations of the 14th Amendment that have been expanded far beyond what some argue was originally intended. So what’s the solution? The solution, very obviously, would be to place limits on how birthright citizenship is applied. You don’t necessarily have to eliminate it entirely — you could define it more narrowly. Some argue that even within the text of the 14th Amendment there are grounds for interpretation about who qualifies, since the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” has historically been debated. That’s the argument. And the broader point is this: if a country cannot define who is and is not a citizen, then it raises serious questions about sovereignty and governance. That’s why this debate keeps coming up.

The First Lady is meant to embody unity, home, and family. She is the right hand of the president and, in her own way, a mother to the nation. Melania Trump has taken that charge seriously — focusing her platform on children’s well-being, online safety, and opioid abuse prevention, placing service above self and motherhood above politics. So as 2028 rumors gather and the question of our next president looms, it’s worth considering who would stand beside him and what she would do with the platform. If California Governor Gavin Newsom becomes our next president, ask yourself how detrimental it would be for our nation if his First “Partner,” Jennifer Siebel Newsom, assumes greater power. Not First Lady — First Partner. The title she bestows on herself tells you everything you need to know, and the damage would follow accordingly. Siebel Newsom wouldn’t be the mother of our nation. She’d be the caregiver, the parent, whatever gender-neutral term doesn’t upset the acolytes of the far Left who propelled the couple to power.  She wouldn’t reserve that terminology for herself alone; she would conscript the rest of us into it as well. We need not wonder how she would parent the country. She’s already told us by how she parents her kids. I recently wrote about how she’s taken her children on what amounts to a Racism Safari through Red State America — hunting for “misogyny, racism, and bullying, oh my!” But a newly resurfaced video reveals the indoctrination began far earlier. Siebel Newsom told an interviewer that she gives her boys dolls “to learn that caregiving is not just an activity reserved for women.” She added that when reading a book with a male protagonist, she simply “changes the he to a she” so her sons can see that “women can be at the center of a story. That women matter. That women are interesting.” You have to rewrite literature to teach your children that women are interesting? Isn’t this something they should be able to observe at home, or is that a problem in the Newsom household? Then she went further. We are all, she said, “recognizing what it is to ultimately deconstruct all of these gender roles and ultimately be human.” She will “continue to do her work to try and deconstruct these limiting narratives about what it means to be human.” Read that again. In order for the Newsom family to be fully human, they must first dismantle what it means to be a man or woman. I can’t imagine what their dinnertime conversations sound like, but it seems as if the Newsoms are engaging in a war against the imago Dei — the truth that every person is made in God’s image, with an unchangeable, sexed soul. When elites like Newsom use their platform to rewrite children’s books, hand boys dolls as ideological instruments, and treat biology as a social construct to be dismantled, they don’t make us more human. They make us less. They tell boys that the natural drive to protect and provide is toxic. They tell girls that the capacity to nurture is something to be questioned. The result? Confused children, skyrocketing rates of anxiety, depression, and identity disorders, and a culture that treats objective reality as bigotry. The leftist upper echelon calls this harmless. It isn’t. It is state-adjacent indoctrination with a smile and a reading circle. True humanity is not found in endless deconstruction. It is found in accepting the Creator’s blueprint, in living out complementarity, and in rejecting the nihilism that insists man can redefine what God has made. If the Newsoms become our nation’s next parents, we can be sure that their form of “progress” will aggressively erode that very humanity they openly vow to deconstruct — in the form of gender clinics in schools, pronouns in kindergarten, and a generation that no longer knows what a mother is.