NEW ORLEANS—When Turning Point USA Founder Charlie Kirk goes to speak on campus and attracts a large following, that’s not the story—the story is how the Right conspired to open the door to his “extremism,” according to journalists presenting at an investigative reporting conference. David Armiak, research director at the Center for Media and Democracy, and Kyle Spencer, a former New York Times contributor and the CEO of the Pro-Democracy Information Lab, coached a room full of at least 60 reporters and editors on “Tracking Right-Wing Influencers and Movements” at the Investigative Reporters and Editors Conference in New Orleans on Friday. Robert Downen, a Texas Monthly senior writer, moderated the panel. Armiak recounted seeing Kirk at the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s library mall last fall. He saw Kirk “in the center of campus with frat bros all around him, you know, spewing anti-trans, anti-LGBTQ+ talking points” and campaigning for Donald Trump. “I had never seen so many folks standing out, watching him in the past,” Armiak noted, mentioning that Kirk had previously been limited to a room “where it was more difficult for him to get exposure.” “What’s the story?” Spencer asked. “The story is, how is he now next to the library?” She called this a “great opportunity” to write about “the right-wing network” passing bills “that will allow extremism to be normalized and to be more easily spread.” Spencer pointed to nonprofits like the Goldwater Institute that publish draft legislation. In October 2017, the Wisconsin Board of Regents adopted a free speech policy echoing language used in a bill based on Goldwater Institute draft legislation. Both Armiak and Spencer suggested the Kirk speech represented a good opportunity for reporters to expose the infrastructure of conservative policy, which they also branded “extremist.” Armiak condemned a network that “brings together fossil fuel funders, Christian Right activists, pastors, some of these state policy network folks, litigation folks, people like Leonard Leo, Trump’s judge whisperer.” He claimed the members of this network “were deeply tied to the January 6th insurrection and are deeply tied to the manipulation of our democracy and efforts to subvert it now.” Spencer emphasized that “when you’re covering somebody who is voicing views of the extreme Right, they have been sort of planted by a larger network.” No Telling ‘Both Sides’ When it comes to covering the “far Right,” Spencer urged reporters to “avoid features that glamorize and glorify these people,” and to avoid “both-sides-ism”—the journalist’s practice of presenting a point and a counter-point in reporting. “Do not ‘two-side’ stories,” she said. “Their fascism is not a side. Destroying people’s right to vote is not a side.” Spencer also advised reporters not to merely use the names that conservative organizations adopt for themselves. She claimed they “use propagandist tools,” employing “words that we associate with democracy, with humanism” for groups that “are doing the exact opposite.” She gave the example of the parental rights group Moms for Liberty. She called it “an organization that is heavily funded by non-moms, that wants to keep people from reading the books they want to read.” “As a journalist, if you refer to them as ‘Moms for Liberty’ and you don’t put that in context, you’re lying to your readers,” Spencer said. The Christian Right Downen, the moderator, said the Christian Right and business groups “who really want unfettered capitalism” work “in tandem together.” He urged reporters to “find the ideological underpinnings for these groups.” He gave the example of the Council for National Policy, a secretive organization that he said “was founded almost explicitly with a Christian Dominionist agenda … the idea being that Christians need to dominate every sector of society in order to bring about the apocalypse.” Downen gave a “practical tip for reporting,” urging listeners to find people “two, three, four steps removed from somebody who has some really noxious ideologies or has been funding a bunch of other groups, too.” He said making these connections is “an important part of this reporting process.” He also argued that most Americans don’t really support conservative ideas, and that conservatives favor “voter suppression” tactics in order to maintain power. Undemocratic? “A crucial part of the Christian nationalist movement, a lot of these movements, is convincing people that it’s not gerrymandering or low civic participation that is allowing them to sustain power, but rather that they represent some silent majority,” Downen said. “I think it’s really important to be pointing out that these are actually very unpopular ideas and the reason that they often are looking to institute them by subverting democratic processes is precisely because they know that they do not have popular support.” Those on the Left often condemn voter ID laws as a form of “suppression,” preventing people from voting. Conservatives often respond by noting the persistence of voter fraud, and that most polls find Americans broadly favor voter ID laws, even in blue states like California. Armiak also warned about the Convention of States, a conservative group that aims to hold a convention of the state legislatures to amend the U.S. Constitution under Article V. “This is a massive threat,” Armiak said. He noted that “a lot of editors” would say, “Once they have the convention and they got to get 38 states to ratify it, that’s pretty difficult.” The journalist said reporters should respond, “Yeah, but do you want them to get in the room?” He urged reporters to ask, “Who are the extremists that are supporting it in your community?” Advice for More ‘Contextualizing’ A member of the audience who said the Right wants to “tear government out by its roots” asked the panelists, “How do we, as journalists, convince editors and publishers to contextualize this on a higher level than what we’re doing now?” His question suggested that legacy media journalists are insufficiently negative in their coverage of the conservative movement. Spencer did not challenge the question, but proceeded to give advice. She said that “the end game of limited government … of destroying the safety net” is “something that you can really explain to people.” “You should always be using examples that would be alarming to people,” Spencer added. She encouraged reporters to start “reporting on aspects of limited government that would be really scary to people, and that would be really alarming.” Journalists often worry about reporting on truly extreme individuals, such as mass shooters, lest they reward people who are seeking negative attention. Spencer applied this concern to conservative activists, but she suggested reporters solve the problem by telling “a larger story about how dangerous these entities are.” More than 1,600 reporters and editors attended the conference, which included panels on practical tips for investigative reporting. Other panels, however, focused on issues from a left-wing perspective, such as “Following the anti-trans federal actions,” and “Belonging under fire: In an era of backlash against diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts.” The post ‘Fascism Is Not a Side’: Journalists Strategize to Expose the ‘Extremism’ on the Right appeared first on The Daily Signal.

CNN was forced to issue a correction on a Sunday article that claimed President Donald Trump's officials did not brief any Democrats on the president's plans to bomb Iranian nuclear sites. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt called out the biased news network on the social media platform X, saying,...

I’d like to tell you a story about a friend of mine… An old friend. A past friend. A “friend” who sadly dropped me like a hot potato a few years ago. That was super disappointing, but c’est la vie…and that’s not the point of this story anyway. The point of this story is this person — let’s just call them “Miles” — was brilliant.  Still is probably, I assume they’re not dead.  I wouldn’t know because they treated me like I had the plague and disappeared faster than Chris Christie heading into a Golden Corral, but I assume they’re still alive. Anyway, the point is Miles was brilliant.  One of the smartest people I ever knew.  Pretty much off the charts smart.  Creative too.  EQ.  IQ.  Everything. And a hard worker.  Would outwork and outmuscle anyone. Also top tier character (other than the ditching me part, that was pretty crappy).  Someone you would trust your kids with, that kind of a person. But there was one thing about Miles that I never really noticed until now in hindsight looking back… Miles was always pulling a rabbit out of his hat at the 11th hour. Always solving some massive crisis and pulling out the win from the clutches of defeat right at the last moment.  Literally often just minutes before total loss, Miles would pull out the win. Life was always very “hard”. Each story would leave you breathless as he told it, all the twists and turns and then some last minute heroic act, usually involving staying up all night long, working all night or even many nights in a row, often even in adverse weather conditions usually involving sideways rain, mud, wind and all other forms of extreme weather. You’d be exhausted by the end of the story when Miles somehow pulled out the win in the literal last possible moments…again and again.  Over and over. Heck, you could throw this man out to live with the raccoons and he’d somehow come back leading the pack. And I used to think isn’t it amazing that Miles can pull off all these incredible last minute victories over and over — and on one level it sure was. But as time has gone by, I started to realize that perhaps Miles was somehow putting himself in these situations far too often — likely even subconsciously.  It was like he attracted chaos and disorder so that he could then harness and defeat it.  And sure enough it was magical each time when he did!  We were all captivated listening to him recount his wild victories! But was all of that really necessary? Or was there a shorter, more direct, easier path to the same result? The more I looked back I realized it was Law 10 of Robert Greene’s 48 Laws of Power on full display: LAW 10 – INFECTION: AVOID THE UNHAPPY AND UNLUCKY: To be clear, Miles wasn’t unhappy or unlucky, quite the contrary. But it was the same principle at play. He was somehow attracting all of these wildly chaotic situations and emerging as the hero at the 11:59pm hour each time. Ok so….why do I tell you all of that? Well one, it’s a good story right? But of course I also have a deeper purpose. I tell you all of that because what I saw in Miles is exactly what I see in Thomas Massie. Good guy. Brilliant even! Principled. Strong. Courageous. In fact, I’ve written positively to praise Thomas Massie many times in the past because he does take principled, correct stands on almost all issues. But also….impractical?  An obstacle to real success?  An obstacle to actually making any deal?  An obstacle to progress and movement forward?  Too smart for his own good? Almost certainly yes to all.   In case you haven’t been following close enough, I’m talking about Thomas Massie because a massive rift has formed between Massie and Trump and between supporters of each. President Trump has been hitting massive very hard recently, posting “GET THIS BUM OUT OF OFFICE ASAP!” And on the flip side, good people like Cassandra over at The Gateway Pundit and Dr. Mary Talley Bowden are loudly voicing their support for Massie: All my homies support @RepThomasMassie pic.twitter.com/WQE8yJuBmG — Cassandra MacDonald (@CassandraRules) June 22, 2025 I hope @RepThomasMassie will run for @POTUS. — Mary Talley Bowden MD (@MdBreathe) June 22, 2025 Here’s where I come down on this debate, and why I told you the story about my old friend Miles…   Believe it or not, I believe you can sometimes actually be “too smart” and “too principled” for your own good. That may sound crazy and even wrong, but allow me to explain. Almost NO wildly successful entrepreneurs come from top of their class 4.0 GPA students.  Did you know that? Almost all hugely successful entrepreneurs are B or C students. Why? Because the ultra-smart are often so smart that they see 4-5 steps down the road and they usually only see what might happen if things go wrong. THIS pitfall and THAT pitfall… Problems abound! Risks abound! Things are not PERFECT! Danger Will Robinson!  HALT!  Freeze!  Do not advance! And for these people, things need to be PERFECT.  They need to be black or white, and just like they have controlled their whole lives in the classroom by studying and acing tests, they need to be able to control things in the real world or they won’t do them. The problem is, that’s not how the real world works. The real world is almost always shades of grey, never black and white. And you don’t get to control most of it either.  You can only control how you respond.  How you adapt.  How you take the BEST course forward, even if it’s not perfect. You simply advance. You move forward. Not that I like him, but as Mark Zuckerberg famously once said, “move fast and break stuff”.  And then put it back together later after you’ve already won. But the A-students can’t do that. It bothers them.  Agitates them.  So much so that they’d rather SIT OUT than take an “imperfect” path that they can’t control. That was Miles. And that is also Thomas Massie. Thomas Massie isn’t wrong in 99% of the things he says and the principled positions he takes. The only problem is, the world is moving on in the meantime. The “perfect road” never arrives. And Massie is going to be “right” all the way to total loss. Take the Big, Beautiful Bill….Massie opposes it. Why? Because it has too much spending. And you know what? He’s right!  It does. But Massie is not a deal-maker. Massie allows “great” be the enemy of “good” and which means Massie never even arrives at “good”. Instead he gets nothing. No progress. No wins along the way. Nothing. Total loss. But he was “right”….so that’s worth it, right? Not really. President Trump is a dealmaker. He knows how to pick up every win along the way that he possibly can, even if it’s not 100% right, not 100% perfect.  He’s still going to grab as many wins as he can as he just keeps moving forward — and then he’s going to clean up the “not perfect” parts later as best he can. That’s the Big, Beautiful Bill in a nutshell. In case you’ve been having trouble following it, allow me to explain it very simply to you… It’s called the Big, Beautiful Bill because they’ve jammed a lot in here. Why do that? Because there’s a unique mechanism in Congress that I won’t go into great detail on right here but basically by doing it this way, at this time, they are able to pass this with a simple 51-49 majority in the Senate instead of the typical 60-votes required for other Bills. Basically the Senate Republicans have 53 votes right now, and a few RINOs in the mix, so they can only afford to lose 3 votes on the BBB and still allow it to pass.  Meanwhile, going a different route would require 60 votes — something they don’t have. It’s all quite complex, but here’s a very short summary: How the Big Beautiful Bill Works 1. Uses Reconciliation Process:The bill is being passed through budget reconciliation, a special process that bypasses the filibuster and allows passage with just 51 votes instead of the usual 60. 2. Normally Needs 60 Votes in Senate:Without reconciliation, Democrats could filibuster the bill, forcing Republicans to get 60 votes—which would require at least 7 Democrats to cross over. Very unlikely. 3. Why Reconciliation Allows 51 Votes:Reconciliation is limited to budget-related items (taxes, spending, debt). It cannot be filibustered, so only a simple majority is needed. 4. Makes Tax Cuts Permanent Now:The bill makes the 2017 Trump tax cuts permanent before they expire at the end of 2025. If it passes, the tax rates stay low without interruption. 5. Prevents a 2026 Tax Hike:If no action is taken, the Trump tax cuts automatically expire in 2026, resulting in a major tax hike on most Americans. Why Doing This Later in a Standalone Bill Fails 6. No Reconciliation Later:Each Congress gets only one reconciliation bill per budget resolution. If Republicans miss this 2025 window, they may lose the chance to use reconciliation later. 7. Standalone Bill Would Need 60 Votes:In 2026, a regular bill to restore the tax cuts would require 60 votes, which is virtually impossible without major Democrat support. 8. Political Landscape Could Shift:After the 2026 midterms, Republicans might lose seats, making it even harder to pass a future tax bill—especially if they lose the Senate or White House. 9. Reinstating vs Extending:Once the cuts expire, reinstating them is legally and politically harder than simply extending them now. It would count as new legislation with higher scrutiny. 10. Big Beautiful Bill Bundles It All:The bill ties tax cuts, spending reforms, and border security into one package, making it easier to unify Republican support. A future tax-only bill would have less leverage and face more opposition. President Trump knows all of this. President Trump is a dealmaker. Heck, Massie knows all of this too, but Massie would rather LOSE if it means taking a principled stand, and President Trump would rather plug his nose and move forward if it means getting the American people massive tax cuts. That’s the bottom line. It’s really just that simple. You have to choose one or the other, and both men and clearly planted their stakes on what they value mosts. President Trump will take the win right now, get Americans massive tax cuts, and then deal with all of this later in the year.  Clean up the bad stuff later, after putting some big wins up on the scoreboard. Massie would rather be “right” and in exchange for that great privilege of being principled impose on you a massive new tax hike. No thanks. You see, Republicans can still cut spending later in the year through the annual appropriations process or a new budget resolution. But Thomas Massie is principled and stubborn to his own detriment. More importantly, to YOUR detriment. Thomas Massie is the living embodiment of “cut off your nose to spite your face”. What benefit is there to being “right” and “principled” if all you do is constantly lose?   Sorry folks, I don’t want that. I elected President Trump to be my fighter and this is EXACTLY why. Thomas Massie would do well to study and learn from President Trump rather than constantly being a thorn in his side. Thomas Massie needs to learn how to “win”. He has no idea how to win or how to make deals, he only knows how to be an obstructionist. In short, he’s “too smart” and “too principled” for his own good — of for YOUR good. I’ll wrap this up by ending back with the analogy to entrepreneurs. The A-students are often so smart and so “intellectual” that they can’t ever explain something in simple terms. They use big words, long sentences, and they lost 90% of the people halfway through whatever long diatribe they’re on. But the B and C students explain things simply — they get right to the point.  They usually also make an emotional connection in doing so.  And they draw people in. If you can’t explain something short and simply, you don’t actually understand it very well. Thomas Massie can go on as many intellectual and principled rants as he wants, but at the end of the day he never scores any wins. At the end of the day, he’s just another Rand Paul. They might be “right” on everything, but they also end up dead last and the history books will barely remember them. I’m sad I had to write this article. I’m sad my friend Miles ditched me like I can some form of viral cancer. I’m sad I have to write this about Massie. But….c’est la vie. Now you know.

Iran says it has carried out a ‘mighty and successful’ attack on a US air base in Qatar. The attacks come after the US dropped “bunker buster bombs” on three of Irans key nuclear sites [...] The post Iran Attacks US Military Base In Qatar appeared first on The People's Voice.

Germany is set to reinstate a mandatory military draft, driven by escalating fears of World War III, as Defence Minister Boris Pistorius pushes a new law to bolster national defense. The plan aims to make [...] The post Germany to Reinstate Mandatory Military Draft Amid Escalating WW3 Fears appeared first on The People's Voice.

MIT scientists have issued a stark warning that prolonged use of ChatGPT may trigger mental retardation in users, according to a new study from the university’s Media Lab. The research suggests that reliance on AI [...] The post MIT Scientists Warn ChatGPT Use Is Triggering Mental Retardation in Users appeared first on The People's Voice.

Japan has issued an urgent warning after a study of 18 million vaccinated citizens revealed a 100-fold increased risk of agonizing death following COVID-19 vaccinations. Presented on June 15 by scientists, journalists, and lawmakers, the [...] The post Japan Issues Urgent Warning: Vaccinated Face 100-Fold Risk of Agonizing Death Post-Jab appeared first on The People's Voice.

Vladimir Putin has delivered a stark warning to Donald Trump — a warning not just about Iran, but about history. You’re walking into a trap, Putin told him. A trap that was laid long before any [...] The post Putin Warns Trump: “Globalists Are Using You as a Puppet to Ignite WW3” appeared first on The People's Voice.