One of the suspects accused of throwing improvised explosive devices (IEDs) at protesters outside the New York City mayor’s residence purchased materials used in the attack just days beforehand at a Pennsylvania fireworks store, according to a report. Emir Balat, 18, allegedly bought a roll of safety fuse at a Phantom Fireworks store in Penndel, Pennsylvania, on March 2, five days before the incident near Gracie Mansion, the official residence of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, according to surveillance video obtained by CBS News. The footage reportedly shows Balat entering the store at 12:46 p.m. and purchasing a 20-foot roll of safety fuse for $6.89. “Coming in and buying that was uneventful,” Phantom Fireworks Vice President and General Counsel William Weimer told CBS News. “Had he bought 20 rolls of fuse, it might have raised eyebrows. But buying one or two items of anything in this store is almost a nonevent.” Emir Balat, the 18-year-old Muslim from Pennsylvania charged with terrorism for throwing two homemade bombs into a anti-Muslim crowd near Gracie Mansion on Saturday, reportedly bought the fuse used in the devices at Phantom Fireworks in Penndel, a Philadelphia suburb, on March 2.… pic.twitter.com/EHBslRqvyz — Breaking911 (@Breaking911) March 10, 2026 The FBI is investigating the attack as a potential act of terrorism. In a statement on Monday, FBI Director Kash Patel said, “The defendants allegedly support ISIS and tried to follow the path of that deadly group by attempting to detonate explosive devices in a crowd. The FBI and our partners have no tolerance for terrorist organizations or those inspired by them to engage in attacks. We are committed to stopping acts of violence and will hold accountable those who seek to harm our citizens.” The FBI contacted the company’s national security director on Monday, Weimer said. Balat and Ibrahim Kayumi, 19, both residents of Bucks County, Pennsylvania, are accused of traveling to New York City on Saturday to participate in a counter-protest against an anti-Islam demonstration organized by influencer Jake Lang. Video from the scene shows Balat throwing an ignited device toward police near the mayor’s residence. It has since been identified as an IED. According to the Associated Press, the first device struck a barrier and extinguished itself near officers. Balat allegedly ran away, retrieved a second device from Kayumi, lit it, and began running with it before dropping it. Law enforcement sources told CBS News the devices consisted of sports-drink bottles containing explosive material placed inside glass jars and packed with fragmentation such as nuts and bolts. The investigation has expanded beyond the initial attack, with law enforcement probing whether additional explosive materials were staged near the scene. A day after the attempted bombing outside Gracie Mansion, the New York City Police Department shut down nearby streets after officers discovered another suspicious device inside a parked vehicle on East End Avenue, only blocks from the mayor’s residence. Officials later determined the device did not pose an immediate threat, but investigators said the discovery underscored the seriousness of the incident and the possibility that additional materials tied to the suspects could still be uncovered. Authorities have also uncovered additional evidence linked to the two suspects in Pennsylvania. During searches connected to the case, investigators located explosive residue in a storage unit tied to the suspects and conducted controlled detonations as part of the investigation, according to federal officials. Prosecutors said Balat later told police he was inspired by ISIS and wanted the attack to be “even bigger” than the Boston Marathon bombing in 2013. Balat and Kayumi have been charged with five counts related to terrorism and possession of explosive materials. Federal prosecutors say an indictment is expected.

Oil prices have dropped for two straight days following previous surges, having hit four-year highs on Monday before logging the biggest single-day percentage drop since 2022. Oil prices plunged on Tuesday when Secretary of Energy Chris Wright claimed in an X post that the U.S. Navy successfully escorted an oil tanker through the Strait of Hormuz. Brent Crude dropped to around $81 per barrel, according to MarketWatch. However, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt corrected that claim in her Tuesday afternoon press briefing, which sent oil prices back up, with Brent Crude closing around $91 per barrel. “I can confirm that the U.S. Navy has not escorted a tanker or a vessel at this time, though, of course, that’s an option that the president has said he will absolutely utilize if and when necessary at the appropriate time,” Leavitt said. Using the U.S. Navy to escort vessels through the Strait of Hormuz, through which about 20% of the world’s oil travels, is just one of the options the Trump administration has announced that would bring down prices. The administration ordered the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation to offer political risk insurance to tankers operating in the Gulf. Insurance policies covering a vessel traveling through the strait have reportedly jumped by as much as 37.5%, while others were canceled altogether. In addition, the Treasury Department lifted oil sanctions — most notably on Friday, when Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent issued a temporary 30-day lift allowing India to buy Russian oil. Senate Democrats criticized the decision to lift oil sanctions, writing in a statement, “Now is not the time to clear the way for sales for Russian oil majors and Russian-owned and shadow fleet vessels.” Bessent argued that the lifted sanctions were narrow in scope and would not provide a substantial financial benefit to the Russian government. Russia, the United States, and Saudi Arabia lead the world in oil production.

If you asked someone to name a famous dystopian novel, they’d probably come up with something like George Orwell’s “1984” or “Animal Farm.” Or maybe they’d mention “Fahrenheit 451” by Ray Bradbury. Or if they’re younger, something like “The Hunger Games.” These are all very well-known works of dystopian fiction, and pretty much every school forces students to read at least one of them. What’s interesting about all of these novels is that, in every case, the threat comes from within. You have the dictatorship “The Capitol” in “The Hunger Games,” Big Brother and “The Party” in 1984, the tyrannical pigs in “Animal Farm,” and the fire captain in “Fahrenheit 451.” That’s not a knock against the novels, but it’s worth pointing out. This is the “safe” message that’s approved to teach, in every school in the country. Students are bombarded with the message that domestic authoritarianism is the greatest threat. And then when these students grow up, unsurprisingly enough, many of them are sympathetic to Left-wing messaging about the alleged rise of “fascism” in the United States. But there is one dystopian novel that focuses on an external threat to a sovereign nation. And appropriately enough, this dystopian novel — unlike all the other ones I mentioned — has been censored relentlessly. No school in the United States will assign it. If you mention that you’ve even read this novel, you’ll instantly be labeled a white supremacist by the editors of The Atlantic. Reading this novel amounts to “wrongthink.” It was first published in the 1970s, but it was quickly dropped by major publishers because it was seen as racist and offensive. Currently, it’s only in print because of a small independent publishing house called “Vauban Books.” I’m talking about the book called “The Camp of the Saints,” by the French author Jean Raspail. Contrary to what you’re told, this book is not a “white supremacist” screed. Nor is it concerned solely with the rise of domestic “fascism.” Instead, “The Camp of the Saints” is about a threat that’s external to a sovereign nation — specifically, the threat of unchecked mass migration. As the author puts it, the book is not about “Big Brother.” It’s about “Big Other.” This is one dystopian plotline that you really aren’t supposed to read. But if you do read the book, you’ll quickly come across dialogue that doesn’t exactly mince words, and characters that aren’t exactly subtle. Certainly, back in the 1970s, the novel might have seemed a little over-the-top and hard to believe. For instance, in the very first chapter, a million foreigners from India are on boats, rapidly heading towards the coast of southern France. And as the foreign armada approaches, a white French hippie barges into the home of an old professor. And the hippie can’t contain his excitement about the foreign flood that’s descending on France, his home country. He states, Tomorrow, we won’t recognize this country anymore. It’s going to be reborn. … My real family is all the people coming off those boats. Now I have a million brothers, sisters, fathers and mothers. A million wives. And then he talks about how he’s going to marry one of the foreigners, and all of his friends are going to do the same thing. And eventually, there won’t be any white people left in France. I won’t spoil the surprise of what the professor does to this hippie — it’s a book that’s worth reading, is all I’m going to say — but you get the idea. The book is full of quotes like this. And honestly, if you were a reader in France in the 1970s, the dialogue may have seemed fairly unconvincing. After all, who would actually welcome a horde of impoverished foreigners who were in the process of invading their home country? In real life, how many people would have so little respect for their own country, and harbor such obsessive disdain for their own skin color, that they would welcome the invasion of a million hostile migrants from a distant land? It’s been half a century since “The Camp of the Saints” was published. It’s still one of the only dystopian novels that you’re not allowed to talk about in polite company. But if there was ever any question of whether the characters in the novel were a little over-the-top and unbelievable, that conversation has now ended, as of today. After what just happened in New York City, we can definitively state that, if anything, “The Camp of the Saints” dramatically undersold the extent of the anti-white and anti-civilizational depravity that would take hold in the West. The book was ahead of its time, in other words. As of 2026, everyday Leftists walking around the streets of New York have far more suicidal empathy — and harbor far more anti-white hatred — than any character depicted in “The Camp of the Saints.” We briefly discussed the terrorist attack in New York yesterday. But in particular, we need to focus on how a man named “Walter Masterson” — who was present during the attack — responded to what he experienced. Masterson was in front of the Mayor’s residence demonstrating in favor of more migration to the United States. He was chanting, through a megaphone, that New York welcomes everyone. And then, as he was saying this, one of the Muslim terrorists jumps up behind him, yells “Allah Akbar” and throws a bomb at the conservative activist Jake Lang. This is some of the most extraordinary footage you’ll ever see. There are two angles: Watch: I was in the middle of saying “as a born and raised New Yorker, we welcome everyone into this city” when he threw that over my head. pic.twitter.com/i5iD3MVf7h — Walter Masterson (@waltermasterson) March 8, 2026 Source: @waltermasterson/X.com

Trump-backed Republican Clay Fuller and Democrat Shawn Harris will presumably face off in an April 7 runoff special election in former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s Georgia district, based on the results available as of Tuesday evening. Greene resigned from her position representing the 14th Congressional District on Jan. 5 after a public falling out with President Donald Trump over the Epstein files, despite once being close allies. The special election comes as Speaker Mike Johnson’s (R-LA) Republican majority remains extremely slim, as Rep. Kevin Kiley (I-CA) announced that he would still caucus with Republicans, but would leave the party. This leaves only 217 registered Republicans in the House. There are two other vacancies in the House, one in a Republican-leaning seat and another in a Democratic-leaning seat, with those special elections in the coming months. Harris, a farmer and retired brigadier general, wrote in an X post on Tuesday night that “Marjorie Taylor Greene isn’t on the ballot, but the fallout from her feud still is.” “This race isn’t about loyalty to Trump. It’s about loyalty to the voters of Northwest Georgia,” he wrote. “I’m running to serve the people here at home — not chase anyone in Washington.” Former State Sen. Colton Moore and Brian Stover were other key Republicans in the special election, but Fuller ultimately earned the Trump nod in February, with the president writing on Truth Social that Fuller is “strongly supported by the most Highly Respected MAGA Warriors in Georgia, and many Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives.” In November, Greene shared a video explaining her decision, saying that “loyalty should be a two-way street.” “I’ve been blessed to represent the 14th District of Georgia for five years. That district is filled with some of the most wonderful, kind-hearted, God fearing, patriotic, hardworking people you will ever meet. Good, regular, common Americans,” the congresswoman said. “Because my self worth is not defined by a man, but instead by God, who created everything in existence,” Greene added at the time. The district is deeply Republican, with Greene winning re-election in 2024 with over 64% of the vote compared with Kamala Harris’ roughly 36%. Trump won the district with 68% of the vote, and he won the battleground state of Georgia with just under 51%. All eyes will remain on the Peach State through November, as the United States Senate race is considered a “toss-up,” according to the Cook Political Report. Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA) will face off against either Reps. Mike Collins, Buddy Carter, or former football coach Derek Dooley, depending on who wins the Republican primary on May 19. Trump has yet to endorse a candidate in the race.

As the 2026 midterm elections approach, Democrats are fighting to claim the majority in one or both chambers of Congress. But, according to a recent poll, the Democratic Party is polling below almost every key figure and organization — with the exception of the brutal Iranian regime. An NBC News poll, published by the legacy news outlet on March 8, asked a number of standard questions regarding the economy, military action in Iran, and the overall performance thus far of President Donald Trump — but it also ranked a number of key figures and organizations based on their net favorability. The Democratic Party, with a net favorability rating of -22, ranked near the bottom of the list — in fact, only the Iranian regime ranked below the Democrats, albeit with a much lower net favorability of -53. Pope Leo the 14th ranked highest overall with a net favorability of 34. President Donald Trump (-12) and the Republican Party (-14) were near the middle of the list — and as far as 2028 presidential contenders, Republicans fared far better than Democrats did there as well. Two of the most likely Democratic primary candidates — former Vice President Kamala Harris at -17 and Governor Gavin Newsom (D-CA) at -18 — ranked decidedly lower than current Vice President JD Vance (-11) and Secretary of State Marco Rubio (-7). Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who is rumored to be considering either a presidential bid or a move to unseat Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, was the only Democrat to break into the top half of the list, tying with Vance at -11. The poll surveyed 1000 registered voters, just over half of whom were female. They were evenly divided along political lines, with 42% saying they leaned Republican, 42% saying they leaned Democrat, and the rest identifying themselves as either independent or other. As to the other questions, just under half (44%) said they approved of President Trump’s performance thus far, and 54% disapproved. On border security specifically, the president fared much better, with just over half (53%) approving of his actions and a little less than half (44%) disapproving. On foreign policy, 43% approved and 54% disapproved — a slight shift from one year prior, when 45% approved and 53% disapproved. On the war in Iran, more than one-third (41%) approved of the president’s actions, and just over half (54%) disapproved. A number of polls in recent months have spelled trouble for the Democrats, with one from The Wall Street Journal (in July of 2025) noting that Democrats had sunk to their lowest approval rating in decades, with well over half (63%) holding a negative view of the party.