With so many menu items, it's easy to forget things when shopping for Thanksgiving dinner. Here is what one former grocery worker says people most often forget. Continue reading…

Good Riddance RINO

Candace Owens, the right-wing podcaster, who spent a year claiming President Emanuel Macron’s wife could be a man, claims the Macrons are attempting to have her executed. According to Owens, a whistleblower claiming to be a high-ranking French government employee who has forwarded credible evidence of their position, alleges that French President Emmanuel Macron and […] The post Candace Owens Says the Macrons Have a Hit Out for Her appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

Meta shut down internal research into the mental health effects of Facebook and Instagram after finding causal evidence that its products harmed users’ mental health, according to unredacted filings in a class action by U.S. school districts against Meta and other social media platforms. In a 2020 research project code-named “Project Mercury,” Meta scientists worked with survey firm Nielsen to gauge the effect of “deactivating” Facebook and Instagram, according to Meta documents obtained via discovery. To the company’s disappointment, “people who stopped using Facebook for a week reported lower feelings of depression, anxiety, loneliness and social comparison,” internal documents said. Rather than publishing those findings or pursuing additional research, the filing states, Meta called off further work and internally declared that the negative study findings were tainted by the “existing media narrative” around the company. Privately, however, staff assured Nick Clegg, Meta’s then-head of global public policy, that the conclusions of the research were valid. “The Nielsen study does show causal impact on social comparison,” (unhappy face emoji), an unnamed staff researcher allegedly wrote. Another staffer worried that keeping quiet about negative findings would be akin to the tobacco industry “doing research and knowing cigs were bad and then keeping that info to themselves.” Despite Meta’s own work documenting a causal link between its products and negative mental health effects, the filing alleges, Meta told Congress that it had no ability to quantify whether its products were harmful to teenage girls. In a statement Saturday, Meta spokesman Andy Stone said the study was stopped because its methodology was flawed and that it worked diligently to improve the safety of its products. “The full record will show that for over a decade, we have listened to parents, researched issues that matter most, and made real changes to protect teens,” he said. Right now, DailyWire+ annual memberships are fifty percent off during our Black Friday sale. Join now at dailywire.com/blackfriday. The allegation of Meta burying evidence of social media harms is just one of many in a late Friday filing by Motley Rice, a law firm suing Meta, Google, TikTok and Snapchat on behalf of school districts around the country. Broadly, the plaintiffs argue the companies have intentionally hidden the internally recognized risks of their products from users, parents and teachers. TikTok, Google and Snapchat did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Allegations against Meta and its rivals include tacitly encouraging children below the age of 13 to use their platforms, failing to address child sexual abuse content and seeking to expand the use of social media products by teenagers while they were at school. The plaintiffs also allege that the platforms attempted to pay child-focused organizations to defend the safety of their products in public. In one instance, TikTok sponsored the National PTA and then internally boasted about its ability to influence the child-focused organization. Per the filing, TikTok officials said the PTA would “do whatever we want going forward in the fall… (t)hey’ll announce things publicly(,), (t)heir CEO will do press statements for us.” By and large, however, the allegations against the other social media platforms are less detailed than those against Meta. The internal documents cited by the plaintiffs allege: 1. Meta intentionally designed its youth safety features to be ineffective and rarely used, and blocked testing of safety features that it feared might be harmful to growth. 2. Meta required users to be caught 17 times attempting to traffic people for sex before it would remove them from its platform, which a document described as “a very, very, very high strike threshold.” 3. Meta recognized that optimizing its products to increase teen engagement resulted in serving them more harmful content, but did so anyway. 4. Meta stalled internal efforts to prevent child predators from contacting minors for years due to growth concerns, and pressured safety staff to circulate arguments justifying its decision not to act. 5. In a text message in 2021, Mark Zuckerberg said that he wouldn’t say that child safety was his top concern “when I have a number of other areas I’m more focused on like building the metaverse.” Zuckerberg also shot down or ignored requests by Clegg to better fund child safety work. Meta’s Stone disputed these allegations, saying the company’s teen safety measures are effective and that the company’s current policy is to remove accounts as soon as they are flagged for sex trafficking. He said the suit misrepresents its efforts to build safety features for teens and parents, and called its safety work “broadly effective.” “We strongly disagree with these allegations, which rely on cherry-picked quotes and misinformed opinions,” Stone said. The underlying Meta documents cited in the filing are not public, and Meta is opposing their unsealing. A hearing regarding the filing is set for January 26 in Northern California District Court. (Reporting by Jeff Horwitz in San Francisco; Editing by Nick Zieminski)

Nubya Garcia was born in 1991 in Camden Town, London, as the youngest of four siblings. Her mother is Guyanese, and her father is British Trinidadian. She grew up in a home where music of all kinds was present. She started learning violin at age five, later played viola in the London Schools Symphony Orchestra, and then switched to saxophone at age ten. Her early training included membership in the Camden Jazz Band and studies through the Royal Academy of Music’s youth jazz programme. At the same time, she attended workshops with the organisation Tomorrow’s Warriors under Gary Crosby. By The post Complete List Of Nubya Garcia Songs From A to Z appeared first on ClassicRockHistory.com.

CNN correspondents on Friday’s The Situation Room came to a strange head when the topic of the mid-1940s Nuremberg Trials was brought up in light of the recent controversy concerning “unlawful orders.” On Tuesday, a handful of Democratic Congressmen posted a video telling U.S. military and intelligence members to defy illegal commands, to which Trump retorted with a reminder of the punishment for sedition: death. After reporting White House reactions to the back-and-forth, CNN White House reporter Alayna Treene mentioned a point some on the right have made regarding those Democrats’ video: “The fact that the lawmakers who shared this video or were part of this video did not give any examples of any illegal orders that perhaps the military had received or would receive.” Perhaps they feared a legal battle if they accused Trump of issuing or U.S. military members of following specific “unlawful orders.” Or, more likely, they knew they’re full of it. Treene then finished by reminding of audience of the Nuremberg Trials. You know, that somehow totally comparable event that occurred 80 years ago: But I do want to be clear, we know that the law states that service members should not be obeying illegal orders and to do so would actually open them up to prosecution. I'd remind you of the Nuremberg Trials. And so this is gonna be very messy.     Rounding up illegal immigrants with lawful deportation orders was not a war crime. Prosecuting violent aliens who damaged Americans’ quality of life was completely legal. Where did Treene get the idea that she should share this? Situation Room co-host Wolf Blitzer added on to Treene’s ridiculous comparison with a faulty history lesson: … I was just going to say at Nuremberg, the Nazi generals and other senior military officers simply said they were obeying orders from the top. But those orders were illegal, and as a result, they paid the price for those illegal orders. Well, no, actually. Technically, the orders carried out by Nazi militarists were legal under German law at the time. The Third Reich’s living perpetrators, who carried out genocides and conquests, were prosecuted by an International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg because their actions were sheer evil. Blitzer gave a veiled defense of the Democrats’ joint statement with the appearance of an explanation: “The Democrats were not saying, you know, to go ahead and disobey legal orders. They were saying disobey illegal orders or something that goes against the Constitution.” Yes. And grass is green and the sky is blue. What else is new? The video clearly wasn’t a pure and innocent PSA. Those Democrats intended to stir mutinous thoughts amongst U.S. service members because they didn’t like how the Trump administration had utilized the military as of late. The transcript is below. Click "expand" read: CNN’s The Situation Room November 21, 2025 10:04:10 a.m. EST WOLF BLITZER: Looking forward to that interview. I want to go live right now to CNN's Alayna Treene, she's over at the White House, and CNN's Arlette Saenz, she's up on Capitol Hill. Alayna, let me go to you first. What is the Trump administration saying right now about this? ALAYNA TREENE: Well, there's a few points to make, Wolf and Pamela. One is that they — a lot of them were outraged by that video that you just played of these Democratic lawmakers, six of them, all of whom either served in the military or in the U.S. intelligence community. They essentially were arguing that they were trying to encourage troops to rebel against the commander-in-chief. However, once the President started posting, particularly that post about claiming that they were engaging in seditious behavior and that that's punishable by death, that's when a lot of Republicans started agreeing with Democrats that this went too far. Now, the White House Press Secretary, Karoline Leavitt, addressed this yesterday and she also denied that the post meant that the President was essentially calling on lawmakers to be executed. [Cuts to clip] NANCY CORDES [on 11/20/25]: Just to be clear, does the President want to execute members of Congress? PRESS SEC. KAROLINE LEAVITT [on 11/20/25]: No. [Transition] You have sitting members of the United States Congress who conspired to together to orchestrate a video messaged to members of the United States military, to active duty service members, to members of the national security apparatus, encouraging them to defy the President's lawful orders. [Cuts back to live] TREENE: There's a few things as well, Wolf and Pamela, that I've been hearing in some of my conversations with people in that building behind me. The fact that the lawmakers who shared this video or were part of this video did not give any examples of any illegal orders that perhaps the military had received or would receive. I also want to point you to what we heard from the Deputy Attorney General, Todd Blanche. He said that the Justice Department was going to be opening a formal investigation to look into all of this. But I do want to be clear, we know that the law states that service members should not be obeying illegal orders and to do so would actually open them up to prosecution. I'd remind you of the Nuremberg Trials. And so this is gonna be very messy. There's a chance we will hear from the President today addressing this. A lot of people very eager to know what exactly he meant with these posts. BROWN: All right. So, let's bring in — oh, go ahead, Wolf. BLITZER: No, I was just going to say at Nuremberg, the Nazi generals and other senior military officers simply said they were obeying orders from the top. But those orders were illegal, and as a result, they paid the price for those illegal orders. The Democrats were not saying, you know, to go ahead and disobey legal orders. They were saying disobey illegal orders or something that goes against the Constitution.

Female Priest Says Her Clerical Collar Doesn't Allow Her to See Borders