If you think you understand what an ICE officer faces on the ground in Minneapolis, you’re wrong. We spent the day with ICE officers in Minneapolis, where agents have been under siege for weeks. It was constant chaos. Anti-ICE agitators in the Twin Cities have grown increasingly brazen since the death of Renee Good, a protester who was fatally shot by an ICE officer after apparently striking an agent with her car, causing him to bleed internally. These protests have not distracted ICE from its mission, which has so far led to the arrest of roughly 10,000 illegal immigrants in Minnesota. “It’s not deterring us, we’re still doing [arrests],” Samuel Olsen, the director of the agency’s St. Paul office, told The Daily Wire. “We’ve had to just adjust and ensure that we have enough people out.” ICE’s targets that afternoon included illegal immigrants with drug convictions, assault charges, and convictions for driving while impaired. Some of the targets were released by local authorities who ignored ICE’s requests to hand them over to federal custody. As we departed the ICE office, a “spotter” watched on a nearby street corner as he notified a “network of people that are throughout the city,” Olsen said. The first target was quickly “blown” after outsiders spotted ICE, making it difficult to catch the illegal immigrant in his element, a local restaurant in St. Paul. It was the second time officers tried to catch him after their cover was blown. Still, Olsen said they wouldn’t give up on him. “It looks like there’s people almost everywhere looking for our vehicles, and we were spotted in the lot,” Olsen said. “We’re going to probably move to the next target and then just kind of keep this one still.” It was then on to the next arrest, but it wasn’t long after we headed that way that anti-ICE protesters began following close behind as they communicated with each other on radios. As we neared the target’s apartment, dozens of protesters had amassed on nearly every corner. They gathered by the convoy of officers as they blew whistles and honked their horns to alert the neighborhood that ICE was there. Even a school bus driver passing by was blowing a whistle. The officers decided they wouldn’t be stopped and walked in to knock on their target’s door, hoping to make a peaceful arrest. All the while, anti-ICE activists screamed nonstop insults like “coward” and “no one wants you here” at the officers. Still, the officers pushed through, but were unsuccessful in getting the target to answer the door. They couldn’t take any additional action because they didn’t have a judicial warrant. As the officers tried to leave the area, several anti-ICE agitators blocked them in with their cars. The situation soon grew tense as one of the officers got out and shouted orders at the agitators to move their cars back. “We’re blocked,” an officer said on the radio. “This is bad back here guys,” another could be heard on the radio. “We’re surrounded back here.” Amid the melee, one of the drivers, who was in a Tesla, hit one of the ICE officers’ cars before zooming off erratically. He later continued to follow the officers before he rolled down his window and shouted, “I’m illegal, come and get me.” Assaults on ICE officers have become all too normal, surging more than 1,000%, while death threats against them have increased more than 8,000%. In Minneapolis, protesters are showing up at nearly every raid. Before, “it was very rare … now, we’re making arrests of agitators daily,” Olsen said. “When we have to arrest a U.S. citizen, it really takes us away from our other mission.”

Like many young American girls, when I was a teenager, I hated myself and my body. I was depressed and anxious. Eventually, I was diagnosed with borderline personality disorder and anorexia. It goes without saying that I was no stranger to feeling like I wasn’t “me” in my own body. No one told me to get liposuction for my anorexia. But when I went to the counselor’s office for my first appointment for gender dysphoria, I left with a letter of approval for testosterone. Since I’ve detransitioned, life has felt like a roller coaster. The physical distress I experienced going through hormone “therapy” and multiple surgeries that drastically changed my body is only one portion of how horrific it truly is to not only attempt something impossible by supposedly transitioning from one gender to another, but to return to identifying with reality. I was called a patient, but from start to finish, I was never treated like one. Being a patient requires informed consent and the exhaustion of all avenues of care before resorting to the most drastic option. And yet, from the start, doctors were ecstatic to accelerate my so-called transition without once suggesting mental health treatment. Instead, a counselor suggested almost immediately that I needed to be put on wrong-sex hormones. When I raised any suspicion that this was not the right choice for me, the doctors were far from supportive and made me feel like my voice didn’t matter anymore. I was praised for raising my voice and embracing who I thought I was, but only when I identified as trans. Yet when I voiced a dissenting opinion on the same topic, the response was underwhelming and even shame-inducing. For years, gender clinics, medical associations, and activist groups have driven the conversation around so-called “gender-affirming care,” but there has never been any long-term testing done to see what the implications of these treatments are on minors, especially the ones still going through puberty. Any time a question was raised as to whether this was safe, or if there could be a possibility of trans-identifying minors changing their minds down the road, it was diminished as “rare” and accused of putting politics over the mental health of these children. The Trump administration has been the first presidential administration to sound the alarm on these harmful practices. For the first time, federal agencies started to ask the questions that detransitioners had been trying to warn the public about: are these “treatments” actually safe, or are they doing more harm than good? In his first year back in office, President Trump has elevated the voices of detransitioners like me. Last summer, I had the honor of testifying in front of the Federal Trade Commission, sharing my experience of how I was essentially forced into “gender-affirming care,” instead of the mental health care and therapy I desperately needed. Only a few years ago, my voice would have never been heard in the federal landscape. Gender medicine has thrived in a system with zero accountability. I am proud to be at the forefront of a movement that is finally asking for the kind of accountability that is long overdue. Detransitioners like me have been gaslit into believing we are anomalies, and that if doctors hadn’t taken action, we would’ve been suicidal or worse, dead. What the mainstream doesn’t want you to know is that my mental health issues didn’t magically disappear overnight once I began transitioning — they actually got worse. Yet the doctors who led me down this path have faced zero opposition and zero accountability — until now. President Trump and his administration have been a disruptor to the system of gender ideology since day one. His administration has led the charge to make sure that the doctors, experts, and gender-ideology apologists finally answer the questions that have been stamped down, argued as ridiculous, and smeared by those who chose ideology over reality. One of the first actions President Trump took upon being back in the Oval Office was signing an executive order to protect minors from receiving any sex-changing surgery or procedure. This executive order also directs the Department of Health and Human Services to prevent taxpayer dollars from being used to subsidize irreversible medical harm to children. HHS’s proposed guardrails bar hospitals that perform “gender-affirming care” from participating in Medicare and Medicaid. Late last year, HHS also released a peer-reviewed, evidence-based review concluding pediatric gender interventions lack long-term safety data and do not meet professionally recognized standards of care. Secretary Kennedy formally declared that these dangerous procedures were far outside acceptable medical practice. This bold move was the nail in the coffin of the claim that “the science is settled” and got gender medicine back on track based on evidence, ethics, and informed consent. Detransitioners like myself are grateful for the actions taken by the Trump administration that will ensure the safety and well-being of the next generation. While my detransitioner friends and I may not have been protected, I know that the work we have put in — in speaking out, standing up, and tirelessly testifying across the country — will have a meaningful impact in protecting kids who are struggling with their mental health. I will continue to fight for the childhoods of every gender-confused kid out there so that they are protected from fear, coercion, and medical harm. * * * Prisha Mosley is an Independent Women ambassador and detransitioner. Independent Women Features, the storytelling platform of Independent Women, featured Prisha’s story as part of its “Identity Crisis” docu-series, which highlights the irreversible harms of gender ideology. Prisha’s story, including her pregnancy journey, was documented in two parts, which can be found here and here. The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

There’s a new royal baby on the way. Flora Vesterberg announced her pregnancy on Instagram on January 19. While part of the royal bloodline, this new baby has quite a succession line ahead of them. According to People, Flora’s grandmother, Princess Alexandra, and the late Queen Elizabeth were first cousins. Flora currently sits in 61st place behind her father, James Ogilvy, and brother, Alexander Ogilvy, and 58 others. We won’t say it’s impossible, but the likelihood is pretty slim that Flora’s baby will rule the kingdom. Nevertheless, this is an exciting time for the royal family. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Flora Vesterberg née Ogilvy (@floravesterberg) The Royal Family Can’t Wait to Meet the New Baby Flora shared her excitement about her baby on Instagram with a picture of herself and husband, Timothy Vesterberg, showing off her growing baby bump. “Delighted to share that Timothy and I are expecting our first child. We’re truly over the moon. Photograph by my father @ogilvylandscape xx,” Flora wrote. Enthusiasts always love to see a new baby join the royal family. They filled the comment section of Flora’s post with sweet words of congratulations and encouragement. “Wow congratulations to the both of you Flora. That’s amazing news. I wish you both all the best with your new bundle of joy,” someone wrote. “Amazing news! Huge congratulations to the both of you,” another follower shared. Several people shared their excitement for the royal family, particularly Princess Alexandra and the baby, being her great-grandchild. “Congratulations Flora and Timothy so happy for you both and for all of your family’s, brillant a first great grandchild for Princess Alexandra, amazing news,” a comment reads. “Congrats Flora! How exciting for you!! And how awesome for Princess A to have a great grandchild on the way!” Another person cheered. We hope that Flora and Timothy have a wonderful pregnancy and can’t wait to hear all about their baby. This story’s featured image can be found here

Alternative to animal testing

'NOT California, that’s for sure…'

'No, he doesn't touch me'

Michael La Sasso is expected to make his professional debut in February

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., addressed the United Kingdom Parliament Tuesday morning as President Donald Trump challenges Britain’s policies toward Greenland and the Chagos Islands. “I spoke to President Trump at length yesterday,” Johnson began. “I told the president that I felt that my mission here today was to encourage our friends and help to calm the waters, so to speak, and I hope to do so.” Johnson was invited to deliver a speech to Parliament celebrating America’s 250th birthday. Johnson is the first speaker of the House to address Parliament in this capacity.   It was a true honor to address the UK Parliament today as the first U.S. Speaker of the House to do so. As we celebrate the 250th anniversary of our independence, I wanted to emphasize an important truth — that our shared heritage with Great Britain creates a deep bond between… pic.twitter.com/coZAAMq19X— Speaker Mike Johnson (@SpeakerJohnson) January 20, 2026 The speaker shared that he is “confident that we can and will maintain and strengthen our special relationship between these two nations.”   This relationship continues to “send a message of unity and resolve to our allies around the world, and remind our adversaries and the terrorists and tyrants everywhere that our nations that are dedicated to freedom and justice and order and human dignity are stronger and more resolved now than ever before,” Johnson continued.  The special relationship between America and Britain has had its flash points as of late. Trump announced over the weekend that he would impose a 10% tariff on any country opposing a deal allowing the U.S. to acquire Greenland, including the U.K. Trump also criticized Britain’s decision to cede the Chagos Islands to Mauritius. He called the deal an “act of great stupidity” in a Truth Social post early Tuesday morning. “Shockingly, our ‘brilliant’ NATO Ally, the United Kingdom, is currently planning to give away the Island of Diego Garcia, the site of a vital U.S. Military Base, to Mauritius, and to do so FOR NO REASON WHATSOEVER,” the president added. “There is no doubt that China and Russia have noticed this act of total weakness.” For his part, Johnson also addressed the challenges China and Russia pose to American and British interests. “We see China, Russia, and Iran grow more aggressive and emboldened as they intensify their efforts to exert economic, political, and military influence around the world,” Johnson said. “We see a callous disregard for basic human rights, new provocations, and even the theft of intellectual property on a scale like we have never seen before.” President Trump has his eyes set on Greenland and may tariff countries opposed to the US acquisition of the island. But Congress is skeptical of Trump’s designs for the Denmark-owned island, writed @virginiagmckhttps://t.co/zshUf5t4hj— The Daily Signal (@DailySignal) January 19, 2026 Johnson also made an oblique reference to the current controversy surrounding Greenland. “Clearly, President Trump is taking seriously the modern and dynamic threats that China and Russia pose to our global security, especially in focus the last few days, as it relates to the Arctic,” Johnson said. “Thankfully, our special relationship has always proven much more powerful and enduring than the enemies we face. Together, we represent a common history and heritage and the greatest, most free, most prosperous, most successful and benevolent civilization the world has ever known. And it will endure only as long as we reject, decline, and recommit to our foundations,” Johnson concluded.  The post Johnson Looks to ‘Calm the Waters’ in UK as Tensions in Transatlantic Alliance Rise appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Greenland has been a national security concern of the United States since the 19th century. President Donald Trump is the most recent in a long line of American presidents expressing an interest in either acquiring Greenland or expanding the U.S. military footprint in Greenland in cooperation with Denmark. Given Greenland’s strategic location, Trump’s interest is eminently rational—but the United States should address the valid security concerns raised by Trump without risking a breach with NATO. American interest in Greenland goes back more than a century and a half. Secretary of State William Seward expressed interest in Greenland as early as the 1860s. American interest in purchasing territory from Denmark has a historical precedent as the U.S. purchased the Virgin Islands from Denmark in 1917. The American military presence in Greenland dates to the 1940s, and President Harry S. Truman expressed an interest in purchasing Greenland from Denmark after World War II. The strategic rationale for a U.S. military presence became especially clear with the beginning of the Cold War. With the advent of strategic bombers and intercontinental ballistic missiles, flying over Greenland became the shortest path between the Soviet Union’s main bases and the United States. In 1951, the United States and Denmark signed a broad and comprehensive treaty that expanded upon a 1941 agreement, allowing the U.S. to establish and operate bases and troops in Greenland. Pituffik Space Base sits near the top of Greenland today, supporting missile warning, missile defense, and space surveillance missions. The present public conversation around Greenland ignores some key points that explain the Trump administration’s increased interest in rethinking the American relationship to the island. There is already a legal mechanism for Greenland to declare independence if it so chooses, as Greenland’s 2009 self-rule law “establishes basically a road map for independence.” In 2023, a constitutional commission composed of members of the Greenlandic parliament presented a draft constitution for a post-independence Greenland. Additionally, an opinion poll from last year showed that 56% of Greenlanders are in favor of independence. The Danish government has long said that Greenland’s status is a question for Greenlanders to decide. The government may well also conclude that saving hundreds of millions of dollars a year currently spent supporting the Greenlandic government is a good deal for both Denmark and Greenland. As Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has said “the self-rule law clearly stipulates that the future of Greenland is to be defined by Greenland and Greenlanders.” If Greenland were to declare independence, however, it would lose the generous subsidy provided by Denmark each year (representing roughly half of the Greenlandic government’s budget), raising concerns that some other country could step in to fill the funding gap. American conservatives took note of the potential emergence of a newly independent Arctic state with an uncertain source of income that could be potentially untethered from either Denmark or NATO. They are correct in fearing that China or Russia could potentially fill the funding gap and build a presence in the Arctic that would be unacceptable to both American and European interests. Denmark is a longtime American ally and has proven itself one of America’s most steadfast friends within NATO. Indeed, during the long war in Afghanistan, Danish troops consistently engaged in combat operations and were killed in action fighting the Taliban at a higher rate per capita than any other NATO ally. U.S.-Danish security cooperation is strong, with Denmark already operating U.S.-built F-35 fighter aircraft, discussing the purchase of P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft, and demonstrating a clear commitment to defense spending within NATO. It is clear that should the United States acquire Greenland over the objections of Denmark and other European countries, it could create real fissures within the NATO alliance. Such fissures could ultimately result in the breakup in NATO. What then could the United States do in coordination with Denmark and Greenland? The U.S. has a few options it could pursue in the event the Greenlandic government decides on independence from Denmark. The United States could offer a territorial status, akin to that of Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands, in which Greenland is self-governing and not a state, but is a part of the United States. Alternatively, the United States could offer an arrangement similar to the compact of free association (COFA) agreements we currently have in place with the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and Palau, under which these countries are independent and self-governing, but the U.S. has sole access and responsibility for security matters in exchange for a generous American subsidy. Given Greenland’s small population of less than 60,000 people and an economy of only $3 billion, it would both struggle to arm a military that could adequately defend its sovereignty and to meet its financial obligations in general. Alternatively, the United States could work with Denmark and other European nations to station an increased number of forces in Greenland to better secure the island and the arctic from Chinese or Russian influence. At the same time, American and European governments can work together to access critical resources in Greenland—while at the same time providing well-paying jobs to Greenlanders. Indeed, the best near-term option is for the United States to sign an updated defense agreement with Denmark, one that updates the legal logic presented in the 1941 and 1951 agreements which justified the stationing of forces on the island as part of a continental defense architecture during a time of systemic threats. The updated agreement should formalize and expand U.S. access to Greenland’s territory for military, space, maritime, and infrastructure purposes while reaffirming Greenland’s status as a self-governing territory that is part of Danish sovereignty. Such an agreement would pave the way for the United States to reopen shuttered military bases which would expand the U.S.’ ability to detect Russian or Chinese maritime or air and missile threats to the homeland coming over the arctic pole. The governments of the United States, Denmark, and Greenland now have the opportunity now to craft a future that works to the advantage of all three countries, securing the interests of the American, Danish, and Greenlandic peoples alike. In acquiring Greenland, the U.S. would keep this crucial part of the Arctic free from adversarial influence, while not causing ruptures in NATO. The post The Conservative Case for Acquiring Greenland appeared first on The Daily Signal.