The New Democrat Line on Narco-Terrorists Is That They Are Just Guys Trying to Make a Living

Wednesday’s CBS Mornings showcased a genetic screening company that allows parents to select which embryo they would like to in-vitro fertilize. Co-host Tony Dokoupil interviewed founder and CEO of Nucleus Genomics Kian Sadeghi, who denied comparisons to the eugenics movement. The story surrounded the company’s IVF+ screening service, which would scan for over 2,000 traits and conditions at the tune of $30k. The goal was for parents to be able to select out of 20 viable options which embryo they believed held the best genetic specifications. Dokoupil and Sadeghi listed the traits the screening was capable of revealing, including height, hair color, eye color, intelligence, and diseases such as depression, bipolar disorder and autism. The 25-year-old founder, who had no children of his own, stated: “Life, I think, as a parent, doesn’t just stop at, ‘I want my child to be healthy.’” Dokoupil asked Sadeghi straight-up why his company should not be associated with the 20th century practice: DOKOUPIL: Genetic optimization is not eugenics, because? SADEGHI: By any stretch. Because it’s fundamentally about empowering people with information that they can use to give their child the best start in life. Yes, if you want two inches taller for your child, three inches taller, right? If you want a couple I.Q. point difference, absolutely, by all means, do that. But I’m saying — you’re really asking me here, you’re asking me, what is life about? That’s actually what you’re trying to get at. When you talk about height and I.Q., right? They’re abstractions of life. They were extraneous specifications that were being put on display like at a farmer’s market. That’s empowering prejudice, just like the eugenics of century-past. Dokoupil asked the CEO about the company’s highly questionable ad campaign (Click “Expand”): DOKOUPIL: You use the term your best baby. SADEGHI: Whatever that means to you. DOKOUPIL: Right. But no one is going to sit there and choose, I want a short, acne-prone, anxiety-ridden person with bad eyesight and no ability in sports. SADEGHI: Well, similarly today, people are going to say, “Hey, I don’t want a baby with cystic fibrosis. I don’t want a baby with down syndrome.” And in the same way, that’s their choice. Nobody (in their right mind) would want their child to suffer from a handicap.     The segment mentioned stances made by MIT Technology Review and the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics that condemned the new science trend. Sadeghi offered a somewhat self-contradicting defense of his company’s enterprise: “Because DNA is not destiny, the messiness of life, the nurture element of life, right? How hard your child works, you know? What school they go to, what resources they have, serendipity — all those factors are never, ever going to go away. People forget that. They want to extract on life just to this genetic material. That’s the beginning of life. That DNA is not life. DNA is the beginning of life.” DNA is the building block for biological life, which could have unavoidable effects on one’s future. But choosing who would get to live in the first place would completely rig the game for “desirable” specimens, refusing a chance for those who weren’t. Of course, co-host Gayle King couldn’t find the glaring moral issue with the process: DOKOUPIL: He also clarified that he thinks genetic optimization, his term, is not the same as eugenics because his patients are going into this willingly and voluntarily, big difference from the things from history. KING: Yeah, I think that that’s a very important distinction. But as a parent, why wouldn’t you want to take advantage of something that allows you to minimize disease? I’m struggling to find out the downside here, especially if it’s a voluntary thing too. After dumbly suggesting that a “genetic inequality” caused by the very high price tag could be the issue, Dopoukil came around to pondering over the actual problem: “I also wrestle with that question. I guess what I come down — I don’t know what you’re throwing out when you select A and not B.” Thank you, Tony. At least someone saw the obvious. For more, read about NBC’s coverage of a similar company back in October. The transcript is below. Click "expand" read: CBS Mornings 12/03/25 7:00:52 a.m. [TEASE] 10 seconds [ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: “Designer Babies”] TONY DOKOUPIL: We meet the head of a company that helps parents pick their own super babies, and discuss the ethical concerns. KIAN SADEGHI: You want two inches taller for your child. Three inches taller, right? If you want a couple I.Q. point difference. (....) 7:19:45 a.m. [TEASE] 9 seconds [ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Ahead; “Designer Babies”] VLADIMIR DUTHIERS: Still ahead this morning, a company says it now has the technology to let parents optimize their future kid’s genetic traits. Tony spoke to the CEO. (....) 7:25:38 a.m. [TEASE] 32 seconds [ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Coming Up; Designing the Perfect Baby?] DOKOUPIL: Speaking of resourceful, coming up, a company says it is giving parents the resources that they would need to have a window into their child’s future, picking hair color, eye color, measuring intelligence, different ranges, even things like anxiety or the likelihood they’ll have a substance abuse disorder. It’s not science fiction, not anymore. It’s very real, according to a founder of a company that’s offering all this and much, much more. This is happening right now. We’re gonna get into all of it with the founder and CEO of Nucleus Genomics. Stay with us. (....) 7:32:49 a.m. [TEASE] 13 seconds [ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Up Next; Designing the Perfect Baby?] NATE BURLESON: Up next, one company says it’s making it possible for parents to look into the genetic future of their potential babies. Tony talked with its founder and CEO about this controversial technology. You’ve gotta stick around for this. (....) 7:37:17 a.m. 7 minutes and 55 seconds [ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Designing Your Baby?] DOKOUPIL: Big leaps in science have made a once impossible, unthinkable question suddenly very real. Would you design your future child? CEO Kian Sadeghi said he believes every parent has a right to do exactly that, selecting the qualities they most desire, from height to weight to intelligence. He calls it genetic optimization, and it’s part of what’s been called the Silicon Valley push to breed super babies. Companies, including Sadeghi’s own Nucleus Genomics, say DNA screening of embryos can prevent disease while also giving parents the god-like ability to pick the baby of their particular dreams. So would you do it? We sat down with the 25-year-old founder to talk through it all. SADEGHI: We give you the full range of insight there is to know about your future child. We really think it’s the parents right to know. [ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Company Lets Parents Pick Future Baby’s Traits] DOKOUPIL: Meet Kian Sadeghi, the founder of Nucleus Genomics. It’s a company that can deliver not just a healthier child, he says, but in the eyes of mom and dad, a more desirable child, too. SADEGHI: They want us to, you know, play sports and they want us to go to the best school. They want us to be well educated. They want us to thrive. Life, I think, as a parent, doesn’t just stop at, “I want my child to be healthy.” DOKOUPIL: Which is why, at this sprawling facility in Central New Jersey — [TO SADEGHI] How much lab space do you have here? SADEGHI: Oh, it’s huge. DOKOUPIL: The company screens embryo samples for more than 2,000 traits and conditions as they call them, meaning a lot that’s disease or illness, and a lot that’s debatable. SADEGHI: We look at something like height, even eye color, hair color. DOKOUPIL [TO SADEGHI]: Intelligence? SADEGHI: Intelligence. We give you — DOKOUPIL [TO SADEGHI]: Acne? SADEGHI: — acne, yeah. DOKOUPIL: For $30,000.00, Nucleus offers a program called IVF+, which includes full DNA scans of both parents and up to 20 embryos conceived through in-vitro fertilization. SADEGHI: And then you can actually do the compare. DOKOUPIL: Okay. SADEGHI: You can very easily compare them. Okay? DOKOUPIL [TO SADEGHI]: I’m super interested. — The results come back in the form of a sleek, user friendly menu. [TO SADEGHI] Depression, bipolar, autism. Wow! SADEGHI: Autism, yeah. DOKOUPIL: Allowing parents to minimize disease, according to Sadeghi, while maximizing the traits they’d prefer. SADEGHI: You can see here that this embryo is particularly about an inch taller than typical. DOKOUPIL: Shopping in effect among potential future children before picking the one they want to implant. [TO SADEGHI] You use the term genetic optimization. SADEGHI: Yeah. DOKOUPIL [TO SADEGHI]: I know other people would say eugenics, right? I knew you’d have a reaction to that word. — Eugenics is a 19th century idea used to justify some of the 20th century’s darkest chapters, all in pursuit of supposedly superior genes. [TO SADEGHI] Genetic optimization is not eugenics, because? SADEGHI: By any stretch. Because it’s fundamentally about empowering people with information that they can use to give their child the best start in life. Yes, if you want two inches taller for your child, three inches taller, right? If you want a couple I.Q. point difference, absolutely, by all means, do that. But I’m saying — you’re really asking me here, you’re asking me, what is life about? That’s actually what you’re trying to get at. When you talk about height and I.Q., right? They’re abstractions of life. DOKOUPIL: Sadeghi’s life as an entrepreneur started back in 2021 when he dropped out of the University of Pennsylvania to launch Nucleus, inspired, he says, by a cousin who died of a rare genetic illness. SADEGHI: That’s why today I’m excited to announce IVF+. DOKOUPIL: Backed by investors like billionaire Peter Thiel and Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian, Sadeghi says his company has already helped thousands of families. SADEGHI: You can run 128 samples on this at a time. DOKOUPIL: But even as the company grows with a splashy new ad campaign inviting parents to, “Have your best baby,” the field of reproductive genetics itself is “an ethical mess,” according to the MIT Technology Review. And in a statement last year, the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics determined companies like Nucleus were moving too fast with too little evidence. [TO SADEGHI] So you feel confident in these predictions? SADEGHI: Oh, absolutely. Our predictors can better predict longevity from the embryo’s DNA than any other genetic model ever built. DOKOUPIL [TO SADEGHI]: You use the term your best baby. SADEGHI: Whatever that means to you. DOKOUPIL [TO SADEGHI]: Right. But no one is going to sit there and choose, I want a short, acne-prone, anxiety-ridden person with bad eyesight and no ability in sports. SADEGHI: Well, similarly today, people are going to say, “Hey, I don’t want a baby with cystic fibrosis. I don’t want a baby with down syndrome.” And in the same way, that’s their choice. DOKOUPIL: Whether you agree, Sadeghi says the growth of his company does not mean the dawn of a new class of super humans. SADEGHI: Because DNA is not destiny, the messiness of life, the nurture element of life, right? How hard your child works, you know? What school they go to, what resources they have, serendipity — all those factors are never, ever going to go away. People forget that. They want to extract on life just to this genetic material. That’s the beginning of life. That DNA is not life. DNA is the beginning of life. DOKOUPIL: I also asked Sadeghi if there are any genetic traits at all that he’d be uncomfortable testing for, and he said that Nucleus would provide full insights, openly and proudly, for anything that the science would support. He also clarified that he thinks genetic optimization, his term, is not the same as eugenics because his patients are going into this willingly and voluntarily, big difference from the things from history. GAYLE KING: Yeah, I think that that’s a very important distinction. But as a parent, why wouldn’t you want to take advantage of something that allows you to minimize disease? I’m struggling to find out the downside here, especially if it’s a voluntary thing too. DOKOUPIL: It’s voluntary. There’s a huge amount of potential good in disease reduction. You are contributing to a kind of genetic inequality, if only some of the population can afford to do this, and everyone else is just out there in the wilds of the past. BURLESON: Right. DOKOUPIL: So that might be a concern. KING: The price is $30,000.00. DOKOUPIL: 30K, but that includes the IVF as well. But I also wrestle with that question. I guess what I come down — I don’t know what you’re throwing out when you select A and not B. BURLESON: Right. DOKOUPIL: For example — KING: But I know what I’m getting, though. I may be throwing — BURLESON: But you know what you’re getting. KING: — but I know what I am getting. DOKOUPIL: But like Kian himself in the conversation, he told me he is four inches shorter than his brother. Imagine if Kian’s own parents had access to his technology. KING: Well, he might not be here. DOKOUPIL: He may not be the — so you don’t know what you’re getting at. BURLESON: It might be Leon that he has [inaudible] Kian. DOKOUPIL: Exactly. KING: Yeah. DOKOUPIL: Right. So there’s a lot of nuance here. BURLESON: You know, I — KING: Does he have any children? DOKOUPIL: No, not yet. He’s only 25. KING: Okay. DOKOUPIL: And I love that he was open to each and every question, and we got a fuller interview we’re going to publish online. KING: Oh, I thought that [inaudible] but it was very good. BURLESON: See, you know, I have to be realistic with myself having three healthy kids, and I’m blessed and thankful for that. It’s easy for me to have more questions about this, right? But on the flip side, what if I was a parent who struggled to raise kids for whatever range of — DOKOUPIL: Yeah. BURLESON: — reasons, maybe they are looking at this differently, saying, “If I could do it over again” — KING: Yeah. BURLESON: — “because of whatever struggles I am or my kids are dealing with, maybe I would choose the best possible outcome,” — DOKOUPIL: Yeah. BURLESON: — which is optimizing, like he said. DOKOUPIL: Yeah. KING: If I had some babies here, it doesn’t matter, you will do whatever it takes, whether the baby is perfectly born or not, you will do whatever it takes. And I’ve heard many families say — DOKOUPIL: Yeah. KING: — that it turned out to be a blessing. DOKOUPIL: Yeah. KING: But have any babies been born using that method, has it turned out the way that he said? DOKOUPIL: Babies have been born, but the technology is only a few years old, so we don’t have like 25 years of data looking back. BURLESON: And for clarification, it is not modification — DOKOUPIL: Nope. BURLESON: — of DNA. DOKOUPIL: Just picking your best out of the available things. He calls it generational health, like generational wealth. BURLESON: I need more of this, Tony. I need you to get out there. I need more interviews. DOKOUPIL: I’ll do it. KING: Kian’s phone is going to be ringing off the hook. BURLESON: All right — DOKOUPIL: Yeah.

When BlazeTV host Christopher Rufo penned an exposé on the rampant Somali fraud in Minnesota — which saw billions of taxpayer dollars go to Somalia and terrorist groups — he wasn’t aware the story would blow up like it did.“The Somali fraud story that we’ve been talking about for the last few weeks is, to my great surprise, still dominating the headlines. And oftentimes when you’re talking about the news, you go week by week by week,” Rufo explains on “Rufo & Lomez.”“Stories have a trajectory where they hit orbit, and then they are spinning and gaining power for weeks and in some cases more than a month. And this is one of those stories. ... We launched it, and now it’s really taken on a life of its own,” he continues.And the Democrats, like Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, are not only refusing to realistically address the fraud; they’re making sure the story never dies.“To our Somali community, we love you, and we stand with you. Our police, many of whom are Somali themselves, are trusted partners in keeping people safe. They will not collaborate with any federal agency around doing immigration enforcement work,” Frey announced following the news of fraud.“Our city staff and our law enforcement will not ask the question as to whether an individual is documented or not. That’s not American. That’s not what we are about. And we’re going to do right by every single person in our cities,’ he continued.Frey then attempted to speak in what appeared to be very painful Somali.“That really sums it up,” Rufo jokes, before pointing to something co-host Jonathan “Lomez” Keeperman said regarding assimilation.“You had a great point. You said the liberal myth is that these groups come and become American. But in this case, it’s the precise opposite,” he says. “These groups come, and the Americans become Somalian.”Want more from Rufo & Lomez?To enjoy more of the news through the anthropological lens of Christopher Rufo and Lomez, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

The Indiana House of Representatives passed a controversial bill that would redistrict the state and possibly flip two seats to the Republican column in the midterm elections.Fifty-seven members voted for the bill, while 41 voted against it. The bill will go to the Indiana Senate, where some Republicans have said they oppose the redistricting effort.'Fair maps are essential to protecting Hoosiers' voices in Washington, and today the House voted to do just that.'Republican Indiana Gov. Mike Braun urged the Senate to pass the bill."Fair maps are essential to protecting Hoosiers' voices in Washington, and today the House voted to do just that, delivering a strong congressional map," Braun said. "I commend Speaker Huston and his caucus for having the courage to protect Hoosier voters. I urge the Senate to move quickly next week and adopt this map so Indiana can move forward with confidence."However, efforts to persuade state Senate President Pro Tempore Rodric Bray, a Republican, to support the bill have failed so far. Another Republican said that she received a threat over her opposition to the redistricting bill."Unfortunately, my house was the target of a pipe bomb threat on Saturday evening. This is a result of the D.C. political pundits for redistricting," state Sen. Jean Leising wrote on social media.Trump has blasted those Republicans as "RINOs," an epithet meaning "Republican in name only." RELATED: Supreme Court allows Texas redistricting map for midterm elections; liberals dissent Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita cited the Supreme Court's temporary approval of the Texas redistricting map for the midterms to justify his support of the bill. "This specific map is legally solid. If any group or individual is silly enough to sue, we will defeat their attack in court," Rokita said. "As the United States Supreme Court emphasized once again last night, redistricting for political reasons is constitutional. In fact, the Court has said that redistricting belongs in the legislature — in the hands of the people's elected representatives, not judges."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

CDC's Vaccine Committee Reverses Decades-Long Infant Vaccination Requirement and Subservience to Pharma

Woke Democrat Congresswoman Plays the Victim After Interfering in ICE Sweep, but There's a Problem

Judge Grants DOJ's Request to Unseal the Grand Jury Records From Epstein Sex Trafficking Case

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum after the draw for the 2026 soccer World Cup at the Kennedy Center in Washington on…

Many Americans realize that citizens lost control over the government decades ago.  It seems there is nothing left to rob from them: freedoms have been taken, rights are usurped, speech is targeted. …

Online posters are still laughing at CNN’s Jake Tapper’s ‘white’ lie about the January 6 pipe bomber suspect. Brian Cole Jr. is certainly a blacker shade of pale. This isn’t the first time the…