A Colorado state senator appeared to belittle the faith of critics by referring to “trans Jesus” amid debate on HB 25-1312, after he and his party amended the bill beyond recognition in the wee hours of Monday night, two days before the end of the Colorado legislative session. HB 25-1312 drew national scrutiny after a Colorado Democrat compared concerned parents to the Ku Klux Klan. The bill originally mandated courts to consider “deadnaming” and “misgendering” as forms of “coercive control” in custody disputes, meaning that parents who dissent from gender identity could lose their children. Following loud backlash, Senate Democrats substantially altered the measure after it passed the Colorado House of Representatives. “This email says, basically, ‘I’m accountable to almighty God, because I’m standing up for equality, that my decisions, one day, I will stand before him and be accountable,'” state Sen. Chris Kolker, a Democrat and sponsor of the bill, said on Tuesday. “Well, this is what I believe: Have you ever seen that movie ‘Talladega Nights?’ You see that section where they’re talking around the dinner table, and they’re talking about what their favorite version of Jesus is?” he asked. “Baby Jesus, I love baby Jesus. I love Lynyrd Skynyrd Jesus when angels are behind him and the choir is singing and he’s playing ‘Free Bird.'” “Well, on my day of judgment, I might be standing in front of trans Jesus, I don’t know,” Kolker quipped. No, this isn't a parody video.?A Democrat did literally invoke "trans Jesus" on the floor of the Colorado Senate. Yet the legal maneuvering of Chris Kolker and his party in that chamber is even worse.?1/10https://t.co/TbLbjr1hxt pic.twitter.com/jlDQnxIDPI— Tyler O'Neil (@Tyler2ONeil) May 6, 2025 Kolker’s remarks came amid confusion as Republicans and Democrats in the legislature considered the new version of HB 25-1312. “We just asked the House sponsor, and she doesn’t even understand what her bill does anymore,” Rep. Brandi Bradley, a Republican, told The Daily Signal in an interview Tuesday. “So, I’m just trying to wrap my head around it if the sponsor—the original sponsor of the bill—doesn’t even understand what the bill does.” Bradley warned, however, that the bill represents “a worse attack on parental rights.” While the original version of the bill focused on “deadnaming” and “misgendering,” the new version allows minors to change their names on a birth certificate, cutting out parents in some circumstances. The Republican lawmaker claims the change would allow a court-appointed guardian to change a child’s name if the state removed the child from his or her parents’ custody for disagreeing with the child’s transgender identity. “The statute clearly says that a legal representative can now sign,” she noted. “This is outrageous for parents in Colorado. We need to sound the alarms.” “Colorado’s HB 1312 remains an open assault on parent’s rights and free speech,” Kristen Christensen, Colorado state director for the conservative lobbying group Heritage Action, told The Daily Signal. “This legislation still includes school dress code language, adds to the anti-discrimination act, and muddies up legal documents with ‘sex’ changes. Heritage Action will continue the fight against this awful legislation.” Law Enforcement Concerns Bradley noted that the bill also has a specific section allowing “individuals not lawfully present” in the U.S. to amend a sex designation on their identification documents up to three times. She warned that allowing such changes would frustrate law enforcement’s ability to carry out background checks, prevent mortgage brokers from checking a person’s credit, and enable sex offenders to avoid detection. “How do we know that we’re not giving a job to a sex offender?” she asked. “This is horrific for the health care industry, for the mortgage industry, for the gun industry, for public safety,” adding: “How many sex offenders are going to be working with children as teachers? How many health care workers will be going into senior living?” “How do you background-check people if they change their license three times and they’re here illegally?” The bill would also extend Colorado’s legal provisions protecting illegal aliens in certain contexts, and grant them certain benefits. Critics say that makes Colorado a “sanctuary state,” though Centennial State Democrats contest that characterization. The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration announced last month that authorities had arrested more than 100 illegal aliens in a multiagency raid at an “underground nightclub” in Colorado Springs. The U.S. Justice Department recently sued Colorado over “sanctuary” policies. What Will It Cost? Bradley also noted that an earlier version of the bill, which included the driver’s license changes, was projected to cost $14.1 million. When those provisions were removed, the cost dropped to zero. Now, with the provisions brought back, the bill is projected to cost $15,689. “No, give me a break. It’s not true,” she said. “They’re lying.” Neither Kolker nor representatives for the House and Senate Democrats responded to The Daily Signal’s requests for comment. The post Democrat Invokes ‘Trans Jesus’ After Amending Gender Bill Out of Recognition in Middle of Night appeared first on The Daily Signal.

ABC: DoJ Now Investigating 2022 Abrego Garcia Trafficking Stop

A federal judge ruled against the Trump administration and ordered for 12,000 migrants to be allowed entry and resettlement in the U.S. after the government objected to an injunction from a prior ruling. The Trump administration had estimated that the injunction would apply to only about 160 people, but U.S. District Judge Jamal Whitehead accused them of "interpretative jiggery-pokery" to exempt thousands. 'The government is not free to disobey statutory and constitutional law — and the direct orders of this court and the Ninth Circuit.' The migrants had their travel approved under the United States Refugee Admissions Program, but President Donald Trump ended the program with an executive order when he got into office in January. Whitehead had issued a preliminary injunction against the administration ending the programs, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals partially ruled against him, saying that the Trump administration had the authority to determine immigration law. The court said that the ruling would not apply to migrants conditionally accepted to travel before the Jan. 20 order. However, since the appeals court did not define what conditional acceptance meant, the government concluded that it only applied to 160 people, while Whitehead said it applied to more than 12,000 people. “It is surprising that there could be any disagreement about the meaning of a judicial order that articulates three specific criteria in plain, straightforward language,” Whitehead wrote after the court clarified three conditions to meet the standard. He also said the government was "hallucinating new text" into the appeals court order. “This court will not entertain the government’s result-oriented rewriting of a judicial order that clearly says what it says,” the judge added. “The government is free, of course, to seek further clarification from the Ninth Circuit. But the government is not free to disobey statutory and constitutional law — and the direct orders of this court and the Ninth Circuit — while it seeks such clarification.”Whitehead issued specific benchmarks that the government needed to meet in the coming weeks to fulfill his order to allow the migrants in question to settle in the U.S. The refugee program was instituted in 1980 and is separate from the immigration policy that allows migrants to seek asylum in the U.S. Judge Whitehead was appointed to the court by former President Joe Biden in 2023.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

After years of lying to the American public that Joe Biden was as “sharp as a tack,” former White House staff and the legacy media are now quietly admitting that our suspicions were right all along — Biden was as sharp as a soap bubble. From former White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain to numerous media voices, the narrative has been corrected. People knew. Former Biden press secretary Jen Psaki just addressed the former president’s mental acuity on a recent episode of Semafor Media’s “Mixed Signals.” Pat Gray plays the clip. “I left in May of 2022 ... and I have seen Biden once since then, when I took my daughter to the holiday party this last December after he had lost. And so I hadn't seen him in person during that period of time. I never saw that person — not a single time, and I was in the Oval Office every day — that was on that debate stage,” Psaki doubled down. “Were things that people saw during that period of time that were similar to that or would have been in a category of that? I don't know. Possibly,” she then caveated. “Were they actively covering it up? Were they sort of in denial? Or was that just a bad debate?” Semafor editor in chief Ben Smith asked. “Cover-up is a very loaded term. ... Cover-up is often, like, a crime,” Psaki said defensively. “People use that term as they relate to Watergate. ... It’s a bit of a dangerous term.” “Yes, this is much worse than that,” says Stu Burguiere, calling “cover-up” an “accurate term.” “Yes, it's the truth. People covered up for him, and they're admitting that now,” agrees Pat. “To me, that borders on treason when you're talking about the chief executive of this country.” However, even if we were to give Psaki’s story the benefit of the doubt, it would still fall flat because “before [Biden] was even elected, he had lost a step (or 12).” “We saw it all during the campaign in 2020,” says Pat. Even back then it was clear that “he was not the same guy he was back in 2008 when he ran.” To hear more of the conversation and see the footage of Psaki’s interview, watch the clip above. Want more from Pat Gray?To enjoy more of Pat's biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

The decades-long feud between India and Pakistan broke out into a military attack after a lethal attack on tourists in a region administered by India.Indian officials said on Wednesday (local time) they ordered missile strikes on what they identified as "terrorist infrastructure" of nine locations. The attack was a response to a massacre of tourists in Kashmir last month that was attributed to a Kashmir resistance group. 'This heinous provocation will not go unanswered.' “These steps come in the wake of the barbaric Pahalgam terrorist attack in which 25 Indians and one Nepali citizen were murdered,” read a statement from India’s Ministry of Defence. “Our actions have been focused, measured and non-escalatory in nature. No Pakistani military facilities have been targeted. India has demonstrated considerable restraint in selection of targets and method of execution."In April, gunmen opened fire on tourists in Pahalgam, a Indian-administered part of Kashmir, and killed 26 tourists. Kashmir is a disputed region that is claimed by both countries but only controlled in part since the partition of British India in 1947.Pakistani military spokesperson Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry released a statement vowing that the country would retaliate. “Pakistan will respond to it at a time and place of its own choosing,” said Chaudhry. “This heinous provocation will not go unanswered.” Pakistani sources told CNN that three of the affected sites — Kotli, Muzaffarabad, and Bagh — were in the Pakistani-administered portion of Kashmir, while two of the locations — Ahmadpur East and Muridke — were in the Punjab province of Pakistan. Three people were killed in the attack, including one child, according to Pakistani officials. India did not publicly blame the Pakistani government for the tourist massacre but said that the strikes were in response to the government's “support for cross-border terrorism.” The Resistance Front initially claimed responsibility and then reportedly walked back the claim. The escalation of the feud between the two countries is especially alarming because they are both armed with nuclear weapons. The two nations have fought for control of Kashmir ever since 1947, making it one of the most militarized places in the world. Pakistani Defense Minister Khawaja Asif denied the claim from India that they had struck terrorist sites and called on international media to visit the sites to document that they were targeting civilians. President Donald Trump offered some comments about the altercation from the Oval Office. “It’s a shame. We just heard about it, just as we were walking in the doors of the Oval, just heard about it," said Trump. "I guess people knew something was going to happen based on a little bit of the past. They’ve been fighting for a long time, you know. They’ve been fighting for many, many decades and centuries,” he added. “I just hope it ends very quickly." Pakistan's prime minister, Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif, said the strikes were an act of war. “The enemy will never be allowed to succeed in his nefarious objectives," Sharif said. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

That Thing That Never Happens Happened AGAIN! CO USPS Worker Admits She STOLE Ballots Prior to 2024 Vote

Nuclear Powers on the Brink of War: India Launches Attacks on Terror Targets in Pakistan

Justice Department Opens Investigation Into Anti-Catholic Law

When the Nintendo Switch 2 was revealed, one of the big games confirmed for the upcoming console is Elden Ring, which Bandai Namco Entertainment has given the title of the "Tarnished Edition," since it'll feature more than the base game.

When the Nintendo Switch 2 was revealed last month, we saw the usual suspects: first-party Nintendo games headlined by Mario & Co. which didn't come as a surprise.