'Tireless efforts to safeguard our neighborhoods'

A British woman recently rescued an abandoned housecat who had been living for 2 years in a derelict bathroom, and is arranging to fly the “gentle” animal back to the UK. Hobbyist animal rescuer Chiku Singh was sent a picture of the long-haired cat by a stranger and drove out to Abu Dhabi on August […] The post Woman Rescues Cat That Survived in Derelict Bathroom for Two Years: ‘Rescuing starts with noticing’ appeared first on Good News Network.

News It: Welcome to Derry What To Know Before You Watch IT: Welcome to Derry Release date, cast, and roughly how scared you should be. By Vanessa Armstrong | Published on October 23, 2025 Credit: Brooke Palmer/HBO Comment 0 Share New Share Credit: Brooke Palmer/HBO HBO’s IT: Welcome to Derry is a terrifying ride, with a doozy of a first episode that lets viewers know that the series won’t pull any punches as it explores the horror that the entity known as Pennywise and/or IT inflicts on those who live in a particular part of Maine. If you’re confused about how the show fits into the Stephen King universe overall or even with the recent movies, however, we’ve got you. Read on for all the spoiler-free details you need to know before watching Welcome to Derry. When is IT: Welcome to Derry coming out? IT: Welcome to Derry premieres on Sunday, October 26, 2025, at 9:00 p.m. ET/PT on HBO and will be available to stream on HBO Max. New episodes of the eight-episode season will debut weekly until the finale on Sunday, December 14, 2025. Is Welcome to Derry based on the movies or the book? Welcome to Derry is loosely based on the “Interludes” from Stephen King’s 1986 book. For those who haven’t read the more-than-1,000-page novel, the Interludes take place at different times in the place where the town of Derry is ultimately founded. Welcome to Derry also takes place in the universe established in 2017’s IT and 2019’s IT: Chapter 2. That means that the timeline differs from the book, since those movies moved up the timeline to 2016. The main Interlude that the first season of Welcome to Derry focuses on is the one with The Black Spot, which in the book takes place in the 1930s. In the series, however, it’s set in 1962. Co-creator Andy Muschietti also shared this in a panel discussion that Reactor attended: “I realized that there’s so much story starting with the Interludes of the book. If you’re going to go to the past, why don’t we make a bigger journey? And soon enough, I found myself visualizing an invisible, hidden story within that incomplete puzzle that Stephen King created… There is a reason why we’re saying this story backwards that you don’t know yet. I can’t tell you. But, it just felt exciting. Okay, but how much can an IT prequel really surprise us? We know where this is all going, right? The universe Stephen King created behind IT is vast! And without getting into spoilers, I’d bet a nickel that 99% of people who watch the premiere episode will walk away surprised (among other emotions). Is Bill Skarsgård Back as Pennywise? Yes, and Skarsgård was involved in the idea of the prequel since he and Andy Muschietti (director of the movies and co-creator of Welcome to Derry) were working on IT: Chapter 2. “We were sort of high on the experience and speculating about making the origin story of IT the clown of Pennywise. How did It become the clown? And we thought that there was something there, a great story,” Muschietti shared. IT’s malevolent doings, however, are all over the series. The first season also touches on the fact that IT has been in Derry for a long, long time. We see some of that play out in season one (though apparently we’ll dig into it more in potential second and third seasons). One thing is certain, however: IT has a big impact on the ensemble cast, which includes Jovan Adepo, Taylour Paige, Chris Chalk, James Remar, Stephen Rider, Madeleine Stowe, and Rudy Mancuso How scary is Welcome to Derry compared to the movies and book? It’s very scary! Prepare to be scared Is Welcome To Derry a Stephen King multiverse show like Castle Rock? There are nods to other characters and places in Stephen King’s works. Shawshank prison, for example, is mentioned in passing, and a young Dick Hallorann, who is an older man in The Shining, is a character in the series played by Chris Chalk. Making those connections to the wider King universe isn’t a big part of the first season of Welcome to Derry, however, though potential future seasons of Welcome to Derry may have more. What has Stephen King said about Welcome to Derry? Does it have his blessing? In an interview with ScreenRant, co-creator Jason Fuchs said King was “very involved” in the development of Welcome to Derry. “He would have to read and approve virtually everything, but [the writers] didn’t know what his reaction was to the finished product until he put out a message on Threads that said he loved the show and episode one was terrifying.” How many red balloons are there? Over/Under 99? There’s at least one, according to the latest trailer! [end-mark] The post What To Know Before You Watch <i>IT: Welcome to Derry</i> appeared first on Reactor.

President Donald Trump hears the concerns of cattle ranchers who say his decision to buy beef from Argentina is bad for business, press secretary Karoline Leavitt said. “The president loves our ranchers, and our ranchers love our president, and in fact, the president did a lot for them in his first term,” Leavitt said in response to a question from The Daily Signal. “Here they are struggling because of the many horrible policies of the previous administration.” What will President Trump do to help struggling cattle ranchers? @PressSec tells me: "The president hears them. He has to address these problems for the ranchers, but also for the American consumer. He promised to lower costs, and that's what he's committed to doing."… pic.twitter.com/wYCms2whRa— Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell (@TheElizMitchell) October 23, 2025 “The president loves our ranchers,” she repeated, “and he also loves American consumers, and he wants to do right by both.” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on Sunday that he is considering having the United States buy beef from Argentina. “We would buy some beef from Argentina,” he said, “If we do that, that will bring our beef prices down.” American ranchers, including the largest trade group representing cattle ranchers, have expressed opposition to Trump’s plan. “Cattlemen and women cannot stand behind President Trump while he undercuts the future of family farmers and ranchers by importing Argentinian beef,” the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association wrote on X on Wednesday. Trump’s short-term solution is to import Argentinian beef to increase our supply and lower costs, she said. “The immediate solution to the problem of the rising cost of beef—the president wants to bring that down—is we have to increase our supply,” she said. “So that’s what he’s doing with respect to these imports. The president also is looking out for our ranchers with a long-term plan that was released by the secretary of agriculture yesterday.” She laid out the Agriculture Department‘s three-step plan to accomplish both goals. “Number one, strengthening U.S. cattle production through increased grazing access, endangered species reforms, enhanced disaster relief, increased access to capital and reducing costs for new and young ranchers,” she said. “We want to incentivize more Americans to get into this noble profession, lowering long-term costs by cutting inspection costs, increasing market options for consumers with Product of USA labeling and ensuring consumers know that they are eating American beef,” she said. Leavitt said this is a good incentive for the American consumer. “And lastly, growing the domestic herd while boosting long-term demand to reduce prices for consumers, while growing the markets for our ranchers,” she said. The post Karoline Leavitt Addresses Cattle Ranchers’ Qualms with Trump Plan appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The White House is adding a ballroom and it’s basically the end of the world. That’s been the media message the last few days as the Left has been in near hysterics about a much-needed expansion to the president’s mansion. I guess the government shutdown isn’t going quite as well as they thought. “‘It’s your house. And he’s destroying it’: Trump demolishes White House East Wing” reads a headline from Politico. “Trump is destroying the entire White House East Wing to feed his ego,” reads another headline on MSNBC. This is, truly, one of the dumbest media-concocted “scandals” of the Trump era. And that’s saying a lot. If the legacy media headlines are to be believed, Trump is demolishing the White House in a brazen act of diabolical demolition. Not to be outdone, Democrats are sounding the alarm about what is surely the end of democracy, which has come to an end at least a dozen times since 2016. Here is California Gov. Gavin Newsom who bravely dared to show the country this picture of construction taking place next to the White House. Oh, excuse me, a picture of Trump “literally destroying the White House.” Donald Trump doesn’t want you to see this picture.He’s literally destroying the White House. pic.twitter.com/W63bLLwt82— Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) October 22, 2025 What a monster! Trump is finishing the job the British started in the War of 1812! The ghost of Abigail Adams weeps! In case you got this far and bought into these obviously absurd takes, here’s the skinny about what’s really happening. The White House is fairly modestly sized for the mansion of the head of state. The president in the American system must perform the political and ceremonial functions that come with that job, as is tradition handed down by President George Washington. That means that the president must hold state dinners and other such things as a matter of regular diplomacy. The current space in the East Room of the White House can only fit 200 people. This has occasionally caused challenges when the president has hosted larger events, as the White House explained in a statement in July. The statement isn’t just some kind of spin. In 2009, President Barack Obama held a large, 350-person event for the Indian prime minister. It had to be moved to a temporary tented space on the South Lawn to accommodate all the guests, which turned problematic—and diplomatically embarrassing—when it rained. So, the White House expansion makes practical sense. It’s not even being done with taxpayer money as Trump said that it’s being paid for with his own money and private donations. Further, what’s being removed isn’t very large at all when considering the overall size of the White House complex. Just so we’re clear, the past 48 hours of Democrat meltdowns that Donald Trump is “destroying The White House” have been over construction done on the area in the yellow box: pic.twitter.com/YSE2WbdE5g— ALX ?? (@alx) October 22, 2025 To top this all off, it must be noted that modifications and expansions to the White House have a long presidential tradition. The building had to be almost entirely rebuilt after the British burned it to the ground in the aforementioned War of 1812. Chester A. Arthur, one of the bearded nothings of the Gilded Age (OK, that’s probably unfair but I’m guessing most Americans couldn’t pick him out of a lineup), had the slightly more famous Louis Comfort Tiffany lavishly redesign many of the White House rooms in 1884. The 20th century brought constant changes. Theodore Roosevelt remodeled and “modernized” most of the building not long after Arthur’s redecoration, in 1902. Roosevelt wanted the president’s mansion to be less frilly, more in line with America’s early republican simplicity. William Taft added the now famous Oval Office in 1909. Franklin D. Roosevelt put in a swimming pool in 1933. Richard Nixon built a bowling alley in the basement in 1973. Harry Truman basically gutted the White House in the early 1950s at great taxpayer expense. BUILD THE BALLROOM Just a reminder, for the benefit of left-wing Twitter, that Harry Truman gutted/rebuilt the #WhiteHouse during 1949-52 at taxpayer expense (see below). Apart from furnishings, everything you see inside today is a modern reproduction. And so much for history! pic.twitter.com/2XxNl5chsl— PhilipTerzian (@PhilipTerzian) October 22, 2025 Even Obama made some major White House renovations. He had a tennis court changed to a basketball court. But he went even further than that. Funny enough, an old CNN segment dug up on social media shows the news network enthusiastically covering the $376 million Obama renovation in 2010. A CNN report from 2010:$376 million White House renovation during the Obama Administration.Where was the Democrat outrage then? pic.twitter.com/MvLVDFcTru— Christian Collins (@CollinsforTX) October 22, 2025 Notice how differently CNN covered Trump’s renovation compared to Obama’s. "Deeply depressing": Presidential historian Doug Brinkley on the president demolishing the East Wing of the White House to build a new ballroom. pic.twitter.com/JVDdl95b0T— Anderson Cooper 360° (@AC360) October 23, 2025 So, this whole story is really much ado about nothing. The people squawking about this were among those who just a few years ago openly celebrated the destruction of history and architecture in the name of political correctness. It’s rich for them to scream bloody murder about our “sacred” buildings now. The criticism is far from serious, but I think there is actually something more to the leftwing freak out over the White House expansion than just the usual Trump Derangement Syndrome. As writer Mark Hemingway pointed out on X, what is really eating away at them is that there will now be a permanent reminder in the future that Trump was president. It's so much that anyone really objects to constructing a WH ballroom, it seems people are just agitated they will have to deal with a permanent reminder that Trump was ever president.— Mark Hemingway (@Heminator) October 21, 2025 That this president is putting his mark on history and making physical changes to the White House that they perhaps thought they would never lose after 2020 is too much to bear. Hence the wailing and gnashing of teeth over something that would normally only interest architectural enthusiasts and Washington tourists. The post The Left Is Having a Total Meltdown Over Trump’s White House Expansion appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The UK government is preparing to expand the reach of its already controversial censorship law, the Online Safety Act (OSA), with a new set of rules that push platforms toward preemptive censorship. The changes would compel tech companies to block material before users can even see it, under the claim of stopping “cyberflashing” and content “encouraging or assisting serious self-harm.” On October 21, the government laid before Parliament a Statutory Instrument titled The Online Safety Act 2023 (Priority Offences) (Amendment) Regulations 2025. This legal mechanism, used to amend existing legislation without requiring a full new Act, adds two additional “priority offences” to Schedule 7 of the OSA: Encouraging or assisting serious self-harm, defined in Section 184 of the OSA Cyberflashing, derived from Sections 66A and 66B of the UK Sexual Offences Act 2003 By classifying these as “priority illegal content” under Section 59 of the OSA, the government triggers the law’s strictest obligations for online platforms. Section 10 of the Act lays out the steps companies must take to remain compliant, steps that go far beyond traditional moderation. Platforms will be required to employ preemptive censorship systems designed to “prevent individuals from encountering priority illegal content” and to “mitigate and manage the risk of the service being used for the commission or facilitation of a priority offence.” In reality, this means social networks, forums, and messaging services will need to automatically block or filter posts that algorithms believe might fall under these categories before they are even visible to the public. This would require increased surveillance of people’s online communication. They will also have to implement rapid takedown procedures for any content reported by users as potentially illegal. Failure to comply can result in massive penalties, fines of up to 10% of a company’s global revenue or £18 million ($23M), whichever is greater, and potential service blocking by internet providers. Such broad obligations virtually guarantee that companies will err on the side of over-censorship. To avoid multimillion-pound fines, many will likely suppress borderline or even entirely lawful speech. Automated moderation systems, in particular, are prone to misidentifying context, making it easy to imagine cases where posts offering support or suicide prevention advice could be flagged as “encouraging self-harm.” What’s emerging is a model of online governance where private platforms are deputized as preemptive censors under threat of severe financial punishment. While the stated intent may be to protect users from harm, the result is a legal framework that risks silencing legitimate discussion and turning the UK’s digital public square into a heavily filtered environment dictated by government-defined categories of acceptable speech. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post UK Expands Online Safety Act to Enforce Preemptive Censorship For “Priority” Offenses appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

Joe Scarborough just rediscovered the Constitution.On MSNBC, the “Morning Joe” co-host warned last week of the grave dangers of Donald Trump using government power against political enemies. Nodding journalists agreed. Scarborough cautioned that Trump and his team would face a “wicked cycle” of retaliation and retribution after leaving office if they pursued politically motivated prosecutions.One problem: Democrats already did exactly that.After years of weaponizing the law against Trump and his staff, the left now pleads for “restraint.” With Letitia James, James Comey, and John Bolton all facing charges, the same people who cheered every politically driven indictment now claim to fear the abuse of justice. They are suffering from sudden, selective, highly political amnesia.Faced with the blowback they earned, Democrats are pleading for a truce they don’t intend to honor.The classic argument against weaponizing state power goes like this: Don’t use the system against your opponents, because one day your opponents will use it against you. It’s a reasonable principle — assuming both sides still share the same rules. But once one side has crossed the line, the warning loses its force. You can’t tell your enemy not to fight back while you’re still swinging.For decades, liberals held conservatives in check by preaching against escalation. Republicans, as the self-styled party of small government, were inclined to agree. They saw the use of political power itself as dangerous, so the threat of mutual destruction kept them compliant. But that restraint vanished the moment Democrats arrested protesters, jailed administration officials, and prosecuted a president they impeached not once but twice.Warnings against escalation work only while both sides respect the boundary. Once the first blow lands, the only way to restore order is to make the aggressor regret crossing the line. Like a street fight, it’s not easy to stop mid-swing. The longer it continues, the less likely anyone is to walk away peacefully.Democrats justified their abuse of power with the same excuse they use for everything: Trump is different. He’s a “unique threat,” a proto-dictator, the embodiment of every dark impulse in Middle America. The system, they insisted, had to “make an example” of him to save democracy. Somewhere deep down, they knew they were opening Pandora’s box. They just didn’t think they’d ever have to live with the consequences.Now they’re living with them.Progressives can sense the danger but won’t admit it. Having normalized political prosecutions, they’re trying to erase the record. They pretend the last eight years never happened — that Trump wasn’t convicted on a stack of bogus charges, that administration officials weren’t arrested, that meme-makers and protesters weren’t jailed.“Be careful about jailing your political opponents — they might jail you.”That warning rings hollow when your political friends and allies have already gone to prison.Democrats’ gamble seemed safe because they assumed Republicans would never retaliate. They counted on the party’s traditional cowardice. And for years, they were right. The GOP has rarely shown the will to wield power even when it wins elections.But Donald Trump is not a typical Republican. He doesn’t forgive, he doesn’t forget, and he really doesn’t like to lose. If you give him the chance to settle the score, he will.Even now, as the political pendulum swings against them, Democrats have learned nothing. They insist that every prosecution of Trump was legitimate and every case against their own is tyranny. Their warnings about “political retribution” sound empty because they are. The reckoning they unleashed was inevitable.RELATED: From lawfare to ‘barfare’: Another way to target Trump allies mediaphotos via iStock/Getty ImagesThey disturbed the equilibrium. Now the balance returns.Deprived of moral credibility and electoral power, the left is turning to the only weapon it has left — violence. Having lost the White House, progressives no longer believe in the system they once claimed to defend. They spent years calling Trump “Hitler,” his voters “Nazis,” and his administration “fascist.” When you’ve already declared your opponents subhuman, how do you climb down from that?You don’t. You take to the streets.The rhetoric has reached its natural conclusion. If Trump is Hitler and the country re-elected Hitler, then democracy itself is illegitimate. By that logic, terrorism isn’t a crime — it’s justice. And that’s exactly where the left is headed.The party that claimed to fear tyranny created the conditions for it. The people who warned of political persecution perfected the art. Now, faced with the blowback they earned, Democrats are pleading for a truce they don’t intend to honor.They wanted a world without restraint. They got it.

In a bizarre moment on "The View," co-host Sunny Hostin offered her paranoia about racism from her white neighbors as evidence of racial tension in America. The hosts were discussing a newly released Netflix documentary titled "The Perfect Neighbor," about a white woman who shot her black female neighbor in Florida, when Hostin made the comments. They described the documentary as "heart-wrenching" and "powerful." 'I know that black boys are not given the presumption of innocence and the presumption of youth.'Hostin told the story in the context that the black mother who was shot had also gone to defend her child from racist harassment. "As a mother of black children, I know that black boys are not given the presumption of innocence and the presumption of youth," Hostin said.She then offered the story about her son. "For me, what was interesting was I have had to be in the position where I have gone to my local police department because I know my son is going to be training for the Junior Olympics — running around the neighborhood in an all-white neighborhood — and I have brought him to the police and said, ‘He belongs to me; this is my son. Do not harass him; do not stop him,'" she recalled. "So she was doing what so many black mothers do," Hostin added. Video of the comments was posted to social media, where many users responded with ridicule. "Ironic. She makes the absolute worst assumptions about her White Neighbors having the absolute worst assumptions about her," read one response. "Her accusation isn't remotely credible. She could easily choose to live in an all-black neighborhood and see how safe for son is then," responded another user. "This is the kind of delusional performance that’s made The View a circus instead of a serious show," read another response. "Sunny Hostin turns every personal anecdote into some grand race narrative like she’s living in a 1950s movie instead of a multimillion-dollar mansion."RELATED: Bernie Sanders' aide lashes out at women of 'The View' for segment calling him sexist Photo by Arturo Holmes/Getty Images Others, however, offered their own stories in confirmation of the bias Hostin was describing. "It happens. I live in a gated community, and I have been there for over 13 years, and they still call the local police on me while I am out walking my dog at least 3 times a month," responded another user. "It has gotten to the point where I know all the cops by name, and they know mine."The entire segment about the documentary can be viewed on the show's YouTube channel. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Senate Democrats have doubled down on the government shutdown, blocking a bill that would make sure federal workers wouldn't miss any more paychecks. Republican Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin proposed the bill on the Senate floor that would ensure service members and federal personnel who are currently working would get their paychecks during the Democrat-induced shutdown. Only three Democrats in the entire Senate joined Republicans to pay federal workers. 'They want to shut down the government.'The bill ultimately failed, falling six votes short of the 60-vote threshold. Democratic Sens. Jon Ossoff of Georgia, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, and Raphael Warnock of Georgia bucked 45 of their colleagues and joined 51 Republicans in support of the bill. "We've heard Democrats criticize [Johnson's] bill because it would provide pay only to those working through the shutdown," Senate Majority Leader John Thune said in a post on X. "They say they want everyone to get paid. Well, I have great news: the clean CR would pay everyone. We just need five more Democrats to support it."RELATED: 'These people are sick': Trump admin slams top Dem for justifying shutdown suffering Photo by Kent Nishimura/Getty ImagesAs Thune and his allies at the White House have pointed out, Democrats are the ones who have consistently voted against passing a clean continuing resolution to keep the government open. At the same time, Democrats are demanding Congress renegotiate Obamacare subsidies that aren't set to expire until the end of the year and insisting on passing their hyper-partisan $1.5 trillion spending bill. "I'll just point out the irony in Democrats holding the government and the American public hostage over a health care system that they created," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said during Thursday's briefing. "The health care system was called Obamacare. Why? Because Democrats and President Obama implemented it. And Republicans have always said it's a broken system, yes, but they caused it. And now they want to shut down the government to fix it?"We need to open the government, and then we can have these very important conversations about health care," she continued.RELATED: Democrat senator blocks vote to end shutdown to protest Trump's 'authoritarianism' in drawn-out rant Photo by JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty ImagesRepublicans have remained consistent on the shutdown fight. Their resolution is a clean, nonpartisan funding bill that keeps spending at the same rates Democrats voted for over a dozen times in the past. Thune has even indicated he would be willing to give Democrats a vote on the Obamacare subsidies so long as they vote to open the government.Even still, just three Democrats have mustered up the courage to consistently vote with Republicans to reopen the government. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Numerous Democrats are foaming at the mouth over the expansion of the White House East Wing with a stunning 90,000 square-foot addition paid for by President Donald Trump and other donors.In response to the news that construction was under way on Trump's ballroom, Hillary Clinton — the twice-failed presidential candidate and former first lady who absconded from the White House in 2001 with a small fortune's worth of furniture and furnishings that weren't hers to take — said, "It's not his house. It's your house. And he's destroying it."'Thank you for your attention to this matter.'Sen. Chuck Schumer (N.Y.), one of the Democrats keeping the government shut down, brought a photo into the Senate on Thursday showing the East Wing's demolition, suggesting it was not only illustrative of the White House's "desecration" but symbolic of what the president is "doing to the whole country."In an apparent effort to troll these and other apoplectic Democrats, the White House's website has been revamped such that it now highlights a selection of past administrations' scandals on the premises.Besides referencing in its major events timeline Presidents William Howard Taft's remodeling of the West Wing, Franklin D. Roosevelt's expansion of it, and Harry Truman's "total reconstruction" of the White House's interior, the website now makes mention of Bill Clinton's sordid sex scandal, noting that the former Democratic president's affair with Monica Lewinsky set the stage for perjury investigations and, ultimately, his impeachment.The website also mentions the 2012 meeting between members of the radical Muslim Brotherhood and Obama White House officials, noting that "the Muslim Brotherhood is a designated terrorist organization by nearly a dozen nations." The White HouseAfter highlighting how first lady Melania Trump oversaw the privately funded construction of the tasteful neoclassical tennis pavilion on the South Lawn, the White House timeline references how a bag of cocaine was found in the West Wing entrance lobby during Joe Biden's time in office as well as the degenerate LGBT event Biden hosted at the White House in 2023 where a medical transvestite showed off his fake breasts on the South Lawn. The White HouseThe new timeline appears to have already ruffled some feathers.Sam Stein, managing editor of the anti-Trump Bulwark blog, wrote, "The White House has revamped its website to defend the destruction of the East Wing. And they've done it exactly the way you'd expect."James Blair, White House deputy chief of staff, said in reply, "Liberal Media has [a] problem with documented historical facts being posted on White House website."Deputy assistant to the president Kaelan Dorr got in on the fun, tweeting to Stein, "Thank you for your attention to this matter."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!