A photo showing a man with a cane sitting on the ground at a bus stop led to a groundswell of compassion and a determination to make things right. From that uncomfortable predicament, a local movement in Berkeley, California, was born. It started when Darrell Owens noticed his neighbor, who had just undergone surgery for chronic […] The post Kindness Activists are Adding Benches to City Bus Stops After Man With Cane Has to Sit on a Curb appeared first on Good News Network.

In the latest escalation of a feud between Harvard University and the White House, President Donald Trump threatened Tuesday to pull the Ivy League institution’s tax-exempt status if it does not comply with his demands to end diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) measures, as well as to curb antisemitic activities. That follows the withholding of millions of dollars in federal funding and grants. President @realDonaldTrump is absolutely right—Harvard’s tax-exempt status should be on the table. When a university abandons its duty to foster truth and safety, embracing divisive ideologies over public good, it forfeits that privilege. Time to hold them accountable! pic.twitter.com/p9Dgv9x7b0— Elise Stefanik (@EliseStefanik) April 15, 2025 “Perhaps Harvard should lose its tax-exempt status and be taxed as a political entity if it keeps pushing political, ideological, and terrorist inspired/supporting ‘Sickness?’ Remember, tax exempt status is totally contingent on acting in the PUBLIC INTEREST!” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Trump’s threat comes after Harvard rejected a number of demands from the Trump administration, including ending DEI, reducing the power of activist faculty, and implementing “merit-based admission policies.”  The demands also included measures to combat antisemitism by restructuring academic programs and banning masks (which are often worn by demonstrators), as well as a call for “viewpoint diversity in admissions and hiring.” Protesters in Cambridge, Mass., rail against President Donald Trump’s demands for reforms at Harvard. (Erin Clark/The Boston Globe via Getty Images) Harvard’s refusal to comply led to the administration promptly freezing $2.2 billion in federal funds and $60 million in grants. The federal government began the process last month of reviewing more than $9 billion in federal funds allocated to Harvard. Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., who played a role in hastening the downfall of former Harvard President Claudine Gay, was quick to echo the president’s remarks. Stefanik is a Harvard graduate. “President @realDonaldTrump is absolutely right—Harvard’s tax-exempt status should be on the table,” wrote Stefanik.  “When a university abandons its duty to foster truth and safety, embracing divisive ideologies over public good, it forfeits that privilege. Time to hold them accountable!” Many in the Democratic Party have cheered the academics in Cambridge, Massachusetts, for going to battle against the administration in Washington. Congratulations to Harvard for refusing to relinquish its constitutional rights to Trump’s authoritarianism.Other universities should follow their lead.And instead of doing pro bono work for Trump, cowardly law firms should be defending those who believe in the rule of law.— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) April 14, 2025 “Congratulations to Harvard for refusing to relinquish its constitutional rights to Trump’s authoritarianism,” wrote Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., in response to the University’s noncompliance. “Other universities should follow their lead.” Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., who holds a master’s degree in public policy from Harvard, similarly characterized it as a First Amendment issue in an interview Monday. Van Hollen: "I applaud Harvard's decision not to give in to bullying from the Trump administration. Donald Trump believes in 1st Amendment rights for himself, but apparently for nobody else … the whole purpose of 1A is you don't have the government dictating speech as the Trump… pic.twitter.com/EA0JDhPkEq— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 15, 2025 “You can agree or disagree with the students, but what the purpose of the First Amendment is, is that you don’t have the government dictating speech as the Trump administration is trying to do, so I’m glad Harvard is standing up here,” said Van Hollen. The Harvard-White House rift reflects a larger fight within American politics. For years, education level has been one of the most reliable indicators when predicting political affiliation, as Trump has dominated among non-college educated voters. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, joined the Trump administration in its battle with the Harvard administration, writing on X, “Let’s get the government out of it … Altogether.” The post White House Feud With Harvard Intensifies appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Newsom Signs Bill to Cover Free Healthcare for Illegal Immigrants (He Should Thank Trump)

Environmentalism Has Gone to the Dogs

For the Tax Day edition of CNN’s Inside Politics on Tuesday, media correspondent Brian Stelter joined host Dana Bash to allege that President Trump wants to defund PBS and NPR for “simply covering the news.” If Stelter really believes that then he has a funny definition of what is newsworthy. Of course, any media segment about defunding public broadcasting has to include a good deal of fearmongering and Stelter saw no reason for this one to be any different: It would mean that local stations, smaller stations, and some of these smaller producers would be hardest hit. For example, the group that produces Sesame Street only relies on government funding for about four percent of the production. Sesame Street would still suffer, but it wouldn't go off the air as a result of losing government funding. However, there are all smaller stations in smaller states and rural areas that would really suffer if they lost this funding and those are the kinds of preparations that are now underway. As you said, this would be a big victory for Republicans who have wanted this to happen for decades. But it would also be, in many cases, Republican constituents that would suffer, Dana.     Bash acted as if that was the most profound argument she had ever heard, “Yeah, that is such a good point.” She then asked, “Brian, just real quick, what is the White House saying about not just PBS and NPR, but about its broader fights with media organizations, including the AP, that we were talking about before the break?” Stelter began by explain, “When it comes to the White House's framing of this, it's about taking on wokeism and liberal bias. Here's a part of the quote from the White House website. They've listed off what they believe are examples of partisan bias at NPR and PBS, saying, quote, ‘for years, American taxpayers have been on the hook for subsidizing NPR and PBS, which spread radical woke propaganda disguised as news.’” However, Stelter wasn’t buying it, “Some of the examples on the list on the White House website are examples of NPR and PBS simply covering the news, for example, about transgender Americans. So, that list very much about the president's priorities, trying to push back on DEI. More broadly, Dana, you refer to the AP. We see the FCC under pressure. We see signs of authoritarianism all around. And yet networks like CBS just keep reporting the news. That’s true as well, Dana, at PBS and NPR.” Stelter referenced the list, but never actually cited anything on it. The transgender-related stories the White House cited include: “In 2022, NPR educated the nation on the ‘whole community of genderqueer dinosaur enthusiasts’ and ‘trans-ceratops.’” In 2021, a PBS station aired a ‘children’s program’ that featured a drag queen named ‘Lil’ Miss Hot Mess.’” In 2017, PBS produced an entire movie celebrating a transgender teenager’s so-called ‘changing gender identity.’” Not a segment profiling a transgender teenager, an entire movie. What news value to “genderqueer dinosaur enthusiasts” or Lil Miss Hot Mess have? And that is before we get to non-transgender related examples like NPR’s 2020 “the racial origins of fat phobia.” Sign the petition to help us defund another CNN in PBS and NPR at defundpbsnpr.org. Here is a transcript for the April 15 show: CNN Inside Politics with Dana Bash 4/15/2025 12:33 PM ET BRIAN STELTER: It would mean that local stations, smaller stations, and some of these smaller producers would be hardest hit. For example, the group that produces Sesame Street only relies on government funding for about four percent of the production. Sesame Street would still suffer, but it wouldn't go off the air as a result of losing government funding. However, there are all smaller stations in smaller states and rural areas that would really suffer if they lost this funding, and those are the kinds of preparations that are now underway. As you said, this would be a big victory for Republicans who have wanted this to happen for decades. But it would also be, in many cases, Republican constituents that would suffer, Dana. DANA BASH: Yeah, that is such a good point. Brian, just real quick, what is the White House saying about not just— STELTER: Yeah. BASH -- PBS and NPR, but about its broader fights with media organizations, including the AP, that we were talking about before the break? STELTER: Right. When it comes to the White House's framing of this, it's about taking on wokeism and liberal bias. Here's a part of the quote from the White House website. They've listed off what they believe are examples of partisan bias at NPR and PBS, saying, quote, “for years, American taxpayers have been on the hook for subsidizing NPR and PBS, which spread radical woke propaganda disguised as news.” Some of the examples on the list on the White House website are examples of NPR and PBS simply covering the news, for example, about transgender Americans. So, that list very much about the president's priorities, trying to push back on DEI. More broadly, Dana, you refer to the AP. We see the FCC under pressure. We see signs of authoritarianism all around. And yet networks like CBS just keep reporting the news. That’s true as well, Dana, at PBS and NPR.

On Monday, during a testy Oval Office exchange with liberal CNN anchor Kaitlan Collins, President Trump alleged her network hates the United States of America: “They don’t like putting out good numbers… I think they hate our country, actually.” Moments later, Inside Politics host Dana Bash took umbrage with the President’s claim: “For the record, since we heard President Trump say in the Oval Office that CNN hates our country, CNN does not hate our country. That should go without saying.” Clearly we’ve got two conflicting accounts here. To help get to the truth, we at NewsBusters have decided to partake in the highly respected and not-at-all cynical practice of fact-checking (just like CNN’s Daniel Dale does!). - THE CLAIM -  President Donald Trump: “I think they [CNN] hate our country, actually.”  - OUR VERDICT - - THE EVIDENCE - Let’s consider the above video, which I put together in about 15 minutes by hunting down a few clips purely from memory. While the rhetoric contained in the video is unquestionably anti-American, we must consider each what each speaker’s relationship with CNN actually is. First, Tom Verni, who smugly declared America “a racist, sexist, homophobic, islamophobic, antisemitic country,” was not, and has never been, a paid CNN contributor. While the network invited him on to share exactly the kind of trash insight he offered in the clip, they can’t be considered wholly culpable for his bad opinions. Similarly, Tiffany Cross, who declared that America was “never great,” is not a CNN contributor. Rather, she is a former MSNBC host who was given Joy Reid’s old weekend time slot after Reid was elevated to the 7:00 p.m. Eastern slot on weeknights. However, Cross did used to work for CNN as an associate producer back during the Bush years, so it could be argued that the network is a little more culpable for her her awful commentary than they were for Verni’s. By contrast, CNN completely owns the midwitted, Howard Zinn-inspired “insights” of ostensible reporter Leyla Santiago, who was (and continues to be) on the network’s payroll. CNN not only sanctioned her Sociology 101-level commentary about stolen land and slavery, they actually continued to pay her for it afterwards, and she remained in their employ until 2023. They also own the commentary of correspondent and open-borders activist Rosa Flores, who absurdly declared that illegal aliens arriving in the U.S. were discovering that the American dream was “all a lie.” And of course, W. Kamau Bell, who brilliantly deduced that America would remain irredeemably racist until the government started giving black people (but really just him) free money, was the host of one of those weekend shows that most people don’t know exists. But Bell’s United Shades of America, obscure though it may have been, was nonetheless a real CNN show, which technically makes him a real former CNN host. All told, two of the five morons in this video are current or recent CNN TV reporters, one is a previous CNN host, one is a past CNN employee (to be generous, we can say she only counts for half), and one is a former cop who presumably wandered onto the set by accident. So of the five clips in this video, about three and a half of them were CNN-original commentary. In other words, 70 percent — a C-minus, but still a passing grade. Thus, as long as CNN’s paid, on-air employees can be said to speak for their network, it’s safe to say that CNN does, at least somewhat, hate America.

A leftist mayor has opted to defy a new law in her deep-red state by flying a flag that represents the woke racial and sexual agenda.Less than two weeks ago, Idaho Republican Gov. Brad Little signed into law H.B. 96, which strictly regulates the flags that counties, municipalities, and other governmental entities may fly on public property. Introduced by state Rep. Heather Scott (R-Blanchard), the bill basically restricts public flags to those representing the U.S. and its military, the state of Idaho, local cities, schools, and Indian tribes.Scott indicated the purpose behind the law was to keep flag-flying from becoming too "political." "I believe this bill is necessary for government to be neutral and unified and that government buildings should represent all Idahoans and not be used for political movements or social movements," she said, according to KIVI-TV.The law took effect immediately. However, Lauren McLean, the radical mayor of Boise, does not seem to care. According to reports from over the weekend, Boise City Hall still flies a flag known as the "Progressive Pride" flag, depicting the rainbow associated with non-heterosexual identities, the colors affiliated with so-called transgenderism, and black and brown stripes that pay fealty to non-white skin colors.The Idaho Dispatch reported that the flag was momentarily removed, but the mayor's administration raised it again.McLean indicated in a statement that the sex- and race-based flag represents the inclusiveness of the Boise community. "We will continue flying it because we are a safe and welcoming city that values all comers," she said.'I never looked at her as a law breaker, but I guess she is.'McLean also claimed in her statement that flying the Pride flag has been a Boise tradition that dates back almost a decade. "For nearly ten years the city has been flying the Pride flag," she said.However, keen observers at BoiseDev noticed that the flag that flies over the city currently appears in better condition than the one that flew as recently as February. The colors on the current flag "now appear more vibrant, and a small hole in the flag is no longer present," the outlet reported.The city did not respond to questions from BoiseDev about whether a new flag had been used.BoiseDev also noted that McLean and other city leaders quickly abided by another state law, S.B. 1141, that prohibits sleeping in outdoor public places or inside cars, even while they continue to ignore H.B. 96. The difference may be that S.B. 1141 imposes penalties for noncompliance. Cities that fail to enforce S.B. 1141 can be hit with a $10,000 fine imposed by the state attorney general. Even McLean admitted that she would work with the police department to enforce S.B. 1141 "because we must."H.B. 96 has no such enforcement mechanism. Still, Scott is shocked by McLean's defiance."I just assumed [McLean] would follow the law," Scott told BoiseDev. "It’s interesting that she’s not going to follow the law. I never looked at her as a law breaker, but I guess she is."In a conversation with KIVI, state Rep. Monica Church, a Democrat who represents a district that includes Boise City Hall, seemed to relish the fact that there is no way to enforce H.B. 96 at the moment. She also views H.B. 96 as "an opportunity for political grandstanding," the outlet added.Gov. Little and Attorney General Raul Labrador did not respond to a request for comment from the Idaho Dispatch.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A Massachusetts-based Obama judge blocked the Department of Homeland Security from ending the Biden administration's CHNV parole programs, which allowed multitudes of otherwise inadmissible migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela to flood into the country. U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani also certified a class of all those foreign nationals who received a grant of parole affected by the DHS' termination of the program. Talwani, a daughter of immigrants from India and Germany, claimed that the Trump administration "offered no substantial reason or public interest that justifies forcing individuals who were granted parole in the United States for a specific duration to leave (or move into undocumented status) in advance of the original date their parole was set to expire." "Nor is it in the public interest to summarily declare that hundreds of thousands of individuals are no longer considered lawfully present in the country," continued Talwani. "The early termination, without any case-by-case justification, of legal status for noncitizens who have complied with DHS programs and entered the country lawfully undermines the rule of law." Ironically, the Biden administration appears to have played fast and loose with the law when admitting migrants into the country under the CHNV parole program. Background The House Judiciary Committee noted in a November report, "Through CHNV, each month up to 30,000 aliens, who otherwise have no basis to enter the country and who have 'a supporter' in the United States, can bypass the U.S. border and fly directly into the country 'on commercial flights' to be 'granted parole' for a period of two years by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security." While federal law requires that the DHS secretary use his parole authority on a "case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit," former DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas apparently figured it better to permit inadmissible aliens en masse — the consequences of which were felt across the country but especially in Springfield, Ohio, which was overwhelmed by Haitian nationals. 'This fundamentally flawed program must be permanently dismantled.' According to the report, over 531,000 Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans had entered the country via the program as of September 2024. Congressional investigators noted that in addition to the issue of the Biden administration flouting federal law, the program was "plagued by so much fraud that DHS itself was forced to pause the program in July 2024." Blaze News previously reported that an internal probe found that over 100,000 applicants were backed by approximately 3,000 serial sponsors. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), among the many Republican lawmakers who criticized the program, said in a Sept. 10 letter to Mayorkas, "This fundamentally flawed program must be permanently dismantled. The program has not only facilitated widespread fraud, but has also exposed serious vulnerabilities in our immigration system, leading to dire consequences for public safety." Despite its awareness that foreign nationals were recycling Social Security numbers, addresses, and phone numbers in their applications, the Biden administration resumed the program the following month. Eliminating the program On his first day back in office, President Donald Trump signed an executive order directing DHS Secretary Kristi Noem to "terminate all categorical parole programs that are contrary to the policies of the United States established in my Executive Orders, including the program known as the 'Processes for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans.'" The Department of Homeland Security followed through, announcing last month in the Federal Register that it was terminating the CHNV parole programs on March 25. 'The [DHS] Secretary's discretion in this area is broad.' Foreign nationals whose temporary parole period in the U.S. under the program had not already expired were notified that their paroles would terminate on April 24 "unless the Secretary makes an individual determination to the contrary." The DHS noted further that parolees without a lawful basis to remain in the country had to leave the U.S. before their parole termination date. Those who remained unlawfully would be deported. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt noted, "These are the 530,000 illegal immigrants that Joe Biden flew to the United States on the taxpayers [sic] dime. They're welcome to self-deport using the newly repurposed CBP Home App!" Lawsuit Justice Action Center, Human Rights First, and Haitian Bridge Alliance sued on behalf of foreign nationals to prevent the Trump administration from ending the previous administration's parole processes. They found a fellow activist in Talwani. The Obama judge acknowledged that her "role in reviewing agency action in this area is limited" and that "the [DHS] Secretary's discretion in this area is broad" but nevertheless made clear she would meddle anyway. Talwani said that the migrants have standing to challenge the shortening of their grant of parole, noting that if their "parole status is allowed to lapse, Plaintiffs will be faced with two unfavorable options: continue following the law and leave the country on their own, or await removal proceedings." The judge suggested that both options were undesirable. Talwani noted that if required to depart the U.S., then migrants might undergo family separation, forfeit opportunities to obtain a remedy for their Administrative Procedure Act claims, and face dangers back in their respective homelands. If they remain in the country illegally, then they will lose their legal work authorization and possibly face arrest, wrote the judge. To spare foreign nationals from an election-backed reversal of Democratic policy, Talwani ruled to temporarily preserve the legal status of CHNV migrants and block the DHS' enforcement on April 24. "Hundreds of thousands of our neighbors will go to sleep tonight knowing that the Trump administration's attempts to delegitimize and criminalize our communities have been thwarted, for now," Guerline Jozef, founder of Haitian Bridge Alliance, said in a statement. "The court rightly recognized the harm the government's arbitrary decision-making was threatening in the lives of innocent people," said Anwen Hughes, a legal strategist at Human Rights First. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Two Los Angeles Unified School District elementary schools prevented Department of Homeland Security officers from entering campus to perform welfare checks on five migrant children who reportedly entered the U.S. by themselves.On April 7, the agents arrived at Lillian Street Elementary and Russell Elementary to check on the children but were turned away by the schools' principals, who feared the officers were there for immigration enforcement matters.'DHS is leading efforts to conduct welfare checks on these children to ensure that they are safe and not being exploited, abused, and sex trafficked.'Superintendent Alberto Carvalho applauded the principals for turning away the federal officers."What interest should a Homeland Security agent have in a first-grader?" Carvalho stated during a press conference. "They wanted access to the students to determine their well-being based on, according to the agents, the fact that when they entered this country, they entered as unaccompanied minors.""It is well-known that these students are under the care of relatives," Carvalho declared. He admitted that the agents confirmed they were not with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, but he noted that they arrived in unmarked vehicles and were wearing casual clothing."When the principals attempted to write down details about their IDs, they quickly hid their IDs," Carvalho claimed.According to the superintendent, the agents claimed that the legal guardians had permitted them to check on children at school. Carvalho insisted that was "absolutely, blatantly untrue."Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) and 17 other Democrats sent a letter to DHS Secretary Kristi Noem demanding the agency "desist from immigration enforcement activity targeting children who pose no threat to public safety."The letter stated that the officers arrived at the schools without warrants and were "rightly turned away.""LAUSD staff have informed us that the four students targeted at Russell Elementary were not, in fact, unaccompanied minors," the letter claimed. "We therefore demand that your (sic) provide a briefing to our offices to prove your claims about the agency's operations."DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin addressed the incident in a Sunday post on X.She wrote, "[Homeland Security Investigations] officers were at these schools conducting wellness checks on children who arrived unaccompanied at the border. This had *nothing* to do with immigration enforcement.""DHS is leading efforts to conduct welfare checks on these children to ensure that they are safe and not being exploited, abused, and sex trafficked," McLaughlin continued. "Unlike the previous administration, President [Donald] Trump and Secretary Noem take the responsibility to protect children seriously and will continue to work with federal law enforcement to reunite children with their families."McLaughlin stated that Noem and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. "have already reunited nearly 5,000 unaccompanied children with a relative or safe guardian" after former President Joe Biden's administration lost track of 320,000 unaccompanied migrant children.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!