A group of up to 20 violent rioters ambushed immigration agents in San Francisco, with one individual wearing a keffiyeh and wielding a knife threatening to “stab” one of the agents, according to a criminal complaint filed on Thursday.

The Strangest thing about Saturn is that this Man, who worked on the Voyager missions, said he discovered Enormous, Living, Electromagnetic Vehicles inhabiting its Rings. Dr. Norman Bergrun concluded, based on his analysis of Voyager 1 and 2 data, which he detailed in his 1985 book, Ringmakers of Saturn, that he discovered enormous, living, electromagnetic […] The post This Man, Who Worked on the Voyager Missions, Said He Discovered Enormous, Living, Electromagnetic Vehicles Inhabiting Its Rings appeared first on How and Why's.

Legal scholar and Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley says that, according to interview transcripts recently released by the Department of Justice, Ghislaine Maxwell exonerates President Donald Trump from any illicit involvement in Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking operation. Moreover, the former Epstein associate states that “there is no list” and that “she never saw a list,” a claim that Turley believes “hits hard” in Washington, D.C. “There was a true buzzkill feeling in Washington. People, particularly Democrats, are saying that virtually everything the president’s doing is an effort to distract from the Epstein files,” Turley explains. The Trump administration has faced increased scrutiny since Attorney General Pam Bondi said that the list was on her desk, ready for review, then appeared to backtrack. At the beginning of July, Bondi declared that federal investigations found child pornography files rather than an extensive “Epstein List” of clients who visited the multimillionaire’s private island. Democrat lawmakers, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., have since worked to amplify the idea that Trump was attempting to delay the release of these documents, accusing the president of being involved in Epstein’s sex trafficking ring. “Wow, who would have thought that electing a rapist would have complicated the release of the Epstein Files?” Ocasio-Cortez wrote on X on July 11. The DOJ released all transcripts of her interview last Friday, in which she states that she never saw Trump act inappropriately, according to Fox. The transcripts are from July 24 and July 25, 2025, when Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche visited Maxwell to discuss her links to Epstein and offer any potential information on individuals allegedly connected to her former business’ partner. “I actually never saw the president in any type of massage setting. I never witnessed the president in any inappropriate setting in any way. The president was never inappropriate with anybody. In the times that I was with him, he was a gentleman in all respects,” Maxwell stated in the transcript. “The interviews actually would on their face exonerate, but many people are saying, ‘Look, she has a reason to do that. She wants a commutation. She wants a pardon, and this will help her do that. She was moved to a better prison,'” Turley added. “There’s another possibility, right? There isn’t anything on the president, and that she’s telling the truth,” Turley said. “What really hit hard in Washington with his critics is they’re saying there is no list, that she never saw a list. And she believes she knows where that rumor started and that it indeed is false.” The post Turley Says Maxwell Transcript Exonerates Trump and Hits ‘Hard in Washington’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The Art of the Deal, Russia-Ukraine Style

Do you spend too much time in your car?Your local state authorities think you do — and they’re quietly pushing through laws that will give them the power to do something about it. Don’t want to pay a mileage tax? Don’t drive. Need to commute to a job 40 miles away? That’s your problem. Visit family out of state too often? Expect to pay a premium.Meet Massachusetts Senate Bill S.2246. Introduced by state Senate Majority Leader Cynthia Creem, it sets the stage for a future where the government tracks and potentially limits how many miles you drive each year. This isn’t a fringe proposal — it’s working its way through the legislature right now, and similar ideas are being tested in other states across the country.Is this really about emissions — or is it about power and control?What’s in the bill?The Massachusetts legislation proposes the creation of a new government entity that would track vehicle miles traveled, or VMT, and implement policies to reduce them over time. While the bill doesn’t yet impose mileage caps, it does instruct state agencies to create a “reasonable pathway” to cut how much people drive annually.Translation: A government-mandated limit on personal travel is no longer hypothetical — it’s being drafted right now.Bill S.2246 also outlines coordination with automakers and the use of vehicle inspection data to monitor individual mileage. It even suggests changes to urban planning, encouraging the development of walkable neighborhoods and fewer parking options, all with the goal of getting you out of your car — whether you want to or not.This bill didn’t come out of nowhere. It’s modeled on similar policies in places like Colorado and Minnesota, where pilot programs are already testing new ways to tax drivers based on how far they travel.The new war on driversWhile Massachusetts leads this particular charge, it’s far from alone. A number of states are exploring ways to replace traditional gas taxes with per-mile taxes. They claim it’s about addressing the rise of electric vehicles and declining fuel tax revenue. But behind that talking point is a broader plan to monitor and manage how people use their personal vehicles.States to watch include:Minnesota: Testing mileage-based taxes and creating policies to “reduce vehicle use”;Colorado: Committed to reducing VMT through state-level planning;Oregon: A pioneer in per-mile taxation with the OReGO program;New York and New Jersey: Both states are implementing congestion pricing in urban zones — a foot in the door for broader travel-based taxation; andCalifornia and Washington: Actively developing road usage charges and congestion pricing models. Their VMT tax is well into the planning stages.“Pilot project.” Sounds like an innocent trial run, doesn’t it? But pilot projects have a way of becoming law — slowly, quietly, and without voter input.RELATED: A Look at Oregon's Program to Tax Drivers by the Mile Image source: KTVL-TVMoving violationsSupporters say these measures are about managing traffic or protecting the environment. But let’s be honest: This is about expanding state authority into private life.It’s not just taxation. It’s surveillance. Think about it: If a government agency has the authority to track your mileage, it has the authority to restrict it. Combine that with modern vehicles equipped with GPS, connected services, and remote data-sharing, and we’re talking about a future where the state doesn’t just monitor your driving — it can penalize it.Don’t want to pay a mileage tax? Don’t drive. Need to commute to a job 40 miles away? That’s your problem. Visit family out of state too often? Expect to pay a premium. This is a direct attack on working Americans, rural residents, and anyone who depends on their vehicle for daily life.It’s no coincidence that many of these policies target personal liberty while funneling more money into government-approved programs — public transit, bike lanes, and urban planning initiatives that don’t serve the vast majority of residents.Tax by another nameWhat’s being proposed isn’t a substitute for the gas tax. It’s an additional layer of taxation — one that disproportionately affects low-income Americans, small-business owners, and people who live outside city centers. People who can’t hop on a bus or ride a bike to work will end up paying the most.It also opens the door to data collection on a scale we’ve never seen before. Once the government starts tracking your mileage, what’s next? Will your insurance rates be tied to state mileage thresholds? Will “excessive driving” be taxed as a form of noncompliance?Creeping regulationWe’ve seen this approach before — quietly introduce “pilot” programs, sell them as innovative or necessary, and then expand them into mandates. It’s the same strategy used with toll lanes, emissions testing, and now digital IDs and connected vehicles.The Massachusetts’ bill is especially troubling because the state has a reputation for pushing back on centralized control. It was one of the first states to pass a right-to-repair law and strengthen data privacy for consumers. But even in that context, this legislation is moving forward — slowly, with little attention, and under the radar of most residents.The goal is simple: Shift transportation from a private activity to a regulated service. If that doesn’t concern you, it should.What can you do?Freedom of movement is a basic American right. If lawmakers are going to put a price tag on it — or worse, limit it — then every citizen should be aware and vocal.Now is the time to contact your legislators and let them know you oppose mileage tracking and per-mile taxation.Many of these programs are pushed by consulting firms and vendors who profit from tracking infrastructure. As I always say, follow the money.These kinds of authoritarian initiatives don’t care if you’re Republican or Democrat. And once government control over your mobility is normalized, it won’t stop at driving. The same logic can be applied to where you shop, when you travel, or how often you leave your home.What’s happening in Massachusetts is a test case. If this legislation moves forward, expect a wave of similar bills in other states — all claiming to modernize transportation while actually expanding government power over your everyday life.Personal vehicles represent more than just transportation. They’re a symbol of independence, flexibility, and the freedom to move as you choose. That freedom is under attack — not with a bang, but with quiet legislation buried in statehouse committees.Watch closely. Push back early. Because once this kind of control is codified into law, it doesn’t go away easily. We need to get in front of these laws before it’s too late.

Denver Parishioners Worry About 'Psychological Safety' Because Their Priest Is Actually Catholic

Chuck Todd: Don't Make Democrats Live by Their Own Lawfare Rules

Hoax: Russian 'War Hero' Busted for Faking Wounds, Collecting Cash

President Donald Trump's federal takeover of policing in Washington has shifted routine offenses into federal court, where minor arrests are being prosecuted as serious crimes under U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro's directive to pursue maximum charges.