On Wednesday’s edition of The Late Show, CBS’s Stephen Colbert reacted to the incident in Minneapolis where an ICE agent shot a woman who appeared to drive her car at him by claiming that it was the agent who was wrong and that Second Amendment supporters are being hypocrites. Colbert dropped his usual cold open for a solemn address to the camera: “Hi, everybody, we have a comedy show for you tonight, and normally we start these shows with a cold open, but sometimes we don't do that, especially if there's been a shocking tragedy and there's been another. This morning in Minneapolis a 37-year-old woman was shot and killed by an ICE agent in front of her neighbors. Homeland Security Secretary Noem claimed the slain woman committed an act of domestic terrorism and says the agent acted in self-defense. The mayor of Minneapolis watched the video tape of the killing and said that claim is, and I quote, ‘bull[bleep].’ I think Governor Walz expressed it well.”     In a clip, Walz alleged, “What we’re seeing is the consequences of governance designed to generate fear, headlines, and conflict… To Donald Trump and Kristi Noem, you've done enough.” Much later, Colbert asked MS NOW’s Chris Hayes to describe what happened. After declaring we do not know whether the woman was told to leave or get out of her car, he claimed, “An ICE agent approached the car, she appears on both angles of the video to be first backing up and then trying to, basically, drive her car away from the armed men who are coming to accost her.” Hayes did manage to mention that there was an agent in front of the car but tried to downplay its significance, "One of the ICE agents has positioned himself right at the front right corner of the car. He proceeds to fire four shots, three or four shots from extremely close range into the driver's side of the car. The first shot from head on, and the next three with him in a 90-degree angle, you can see it in the freeze frame. The gun is like this and the open window is like this, so he is out of the way of the car."     Later, Colbert sensed hypocrisy was afoot, “the power of the federal government instilling fear in the people, fear of violence in the people. I'm in no way condoning this, but isn't protecting ourselves against that the argument the Second Amendment people have made for so many years about why we are supposed to have guns?” As Hayes agreed, Colbert continued, “I'm not telling anybody to use violence against the government, but that seems to be an odd conflict between those who might support the president and his support of the Second Amendment and the fact that this is exactly what they described in their fantasies and why the Supreme Court said that personal protection is what is granted by the Second Amendment.” No, using law enforcement using guns in response to the belief someone is driving an SUV at them is not why the Second Amendment exists. Here is a transcript for the January 7 show: CBS The Late Show with Stephen Colbert 1/7/2026 11:35 PM ET STEPHEN COLBERT: Hi, everybody, we have a comedy show for you tonight, and normally we start these shows with a cold open, but sometimes we don't do that, especially if there's been a shocking tragedy and there's been another. This morning in Minneapolis a 37-year-old woman was shot and killed by an ICE agent in front of her neighbors. Homeland Security Secretary Noem claimed the slain woman committed an act of domestic terrorism and says the agent acted in self-defense. The mayor of Minneapolis watched the video tape of the killing and said that claim is, and I quote, “bull[bleep].” I think Governor Walz expressed it well. TIM WALZ: What we’re seeing is the consequences of governance designed to generate fear, headlines, and conflict. [jump cut] Donald Trump and his administration may not care that much about Minnesota, that’s been pretty evident, but we love this state. We won't let them tear us apart, we’ll not turn against each other [jump cut] to Americans, I ask you this, please stand with Minneapolis. [jump cut] From here on either a very simple message. We do not need any further help from the federal government. To Donald Trump and Kristi Noem, you've done enough. … CHRIS HAYES: An ICE agent approached the car, she appears on both angles of the video to be first backing up and then trying to, basically, drive her car away from the armed men who are coming to accost her. One of the ICE agents has positioned himself right at the front right corner of the car. He proceeds to fire four shots, three or four shots from extremely close range into the driver's side of the car. The first shot from head on, and the next three with him in a 90-degree angle, you can see it in the freeze frame. The gun is like this and the open window is like this, so he is out of the way of the car. She loses consciousness and the car heads into a lamppost where it hits. Reports indicate that she was without medical attention for between 10-15 minutes. There's reporting on the scene that indicates a doctor attempted to give CPR and was stopped. Her partner was in the car as was her dog and stuffed into the front seat were a number of stuffed animals that belong to her four-year-old daughter who has now lost her mother. … COLBERT: That federal government, the power of the federal government instilling fear in the people, fear of violence in the people. I'm in no way condoning this, but isn't protecting ourselves against that the argument the Second Amendment people have made for so many years about why we are supposed to have guns? HAYES: Yes. COLBERT: I'm not telling anybody to use violence against the government, but that seems to be an odd conflict between those who might support the president and his support of the Second Amendment and the fact that this is exactly what they described in their fantasies and why the Supreme Court said that personal protection— HAYES: Yes. COLBERT: —is what is granted by the Second Amendment.

If Democrat Minnesota Governor Tim Walz incites rebellion and makes good on his threat to use his state’s National Guard to obstruct federal law enforcement, President Donald Trump should have him arrested and charged, Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) said Thursday. On Wednesday, Gov. Walz publicly warned Pres. Trump and Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem that he was mobilizing the National Guard against federal authority following the fatal shooting of an anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) protester who was fatally shot as she hit an ICE agent with her vehicle. “Tim Walz just issued a ‘warning order’ to prepare the Minnesota National Guard for deployment. Let me remind Governor Walz: President Trump is the Commander in Chief,” Rep. Noem said in a social media post citing federal law: “Inciting rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States is also a federal crime under 18 U.S.C. § 2383.” “President Trump should have him arrested and charged accordingly,” the congresswoman concluded. Gov. Walz routinely uses inflammatory rhetoric to demonize ICE agents, such as when he called them “modern-day Gestapo” like that of Adolph Hitler’s Nazi regime. “I've issued a warning order to prepare the Minnesota National Guard. We have soldiers in training and prepared to be deployed, if necessary," Gov. Walz threatened Wednesday in “a very simple message” to Pres. Trump and DHS Sec. Kristi Noem., denouncing the federal government’s efforts to enforce U.S. immigration law in his state in his state. DEM GOV. TIM WALZ: "I have a very simple message: We do not need any further help from the federal government." "To Donald Trump and Kristi Noem: You've done enough." "I've issued a warning order to prepare the Minnesota National Guard. We have soldiers in training and prepared… pic.twitter.com/zWpwQIERuF — Fox News (@FoxNews) January 7, 2026  

Since last weekend’s capture by U.S. military of Venezuela President Nicholas Maduro, who was wanted on narco-terrorism charges in New York, the leftist media and liberal politicians have been falsely “fact-checking” President Donald Trump’s recent comments that Venezuela “stole” oil assets from the U.S. On December 16, Pres. Trump announced a blockade of Venezuela “Until such time as they return to the United States of America all of the Oil, Land, and other Assets that they previously stole from us,” referring to Venezuela’s 2007 expropriation of the oil interests of U.S. companies under then-President Hugo Chavez. “The illegitimate Maduro regime is using oil from these stolen Oil Fields” to finance drug terrorism and other nefarious acts, Trump wrote in a social media post. “America…will not allow a Hostile Regime to take our Oil, Land, or any other Assets, all of which must be returned to the United States,” the U.S. president reiterated. Top Trump adviser Stephen Miller echoed the sentiment in a post the next day: “American sweat, ingenuity and toil created the oil industry in Venezuela. Its tyrannical expropriation was the largest recorded theft of American wealth and property. These pillaged assets were then used to fund terrorism and flood our streets with killers, mercenaries and drugs.” Trump has repeatedly said that Venezuela “stole” oil and oil-related assets from the U.S. and emphasized the magnitude of the “theft.” What Pres. Trump’s critics refuse to acknowledge is that the president’s characterization of Venezuela’s actions as “stealing” and “theft” are figurative, not literal – and that his point is nonetheless valid. Additionally, when Trump says that Venezuela needs to pay back “us” or “the United States,” he once again appears to be speaking figuratively, since the aggrieved parties were American oil companies, not the U.S. as a nation. Trump is “referring to when Hugo Chavez forcefully negotiated contracts and made the national company the majority shareholder,” Rice University’s Latin America Energy Program Director Francisco Monaldi explained in an interview published three days after Maduro’s arrest. Beginning in 1914, U.S. companies spent untold billions of dollars providing the capital, infrastructure, equipment and technology enabling Venezuela to become a major oil-producing nation, in exchange for business ownership, participation in joint ventures and rights to extract, produce and sell the country’s oil. In the 1970’s, however, Venezuela began to increasingly restrict foreign ownership and profitability, culminating in complete nationalization and expropriation in 2007. Taxes and fees were created or raised, while the percent of ownership U.S. oil companies were allowed to have in their joint ventures with Venezuela was reduced – and, ultimately, eliminated when all assets were fully expropriated in 2007. Still, Venezuela’s takeover was actually more a breach of a business agreement than outright theft, as Chavez voided existing trade treaties and U.S. companies left rather than accept his new terms. Thus, any offenses committed were contractual, and thus civil, not criminal. A World Bank arbitration tribunal ruled as much in 2014, deciding a lawsuit by Exxon Mobil against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. “They stole it by force,” Trump said recently, regarding Venezuela’s nationalization. And, indeed, Venezuela offered U.S. oil companies a take-it-or-leave-it deal to continue operating in the country – but, only if they would accept a new agreement greatly curtailing their ownership interests and revenue. The U.S. companies were given four months to accept the onerous, new terms. Only Chevron took the deal, while Exxon Mobil and Conoco chose to abandon their operations in the country and file suit against Venezuela, requesting arbitration. Today, Chevron produces an estimated 25% of Venezuela’s oil exports. In the arbitration case, the World Bank’s International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) ruled that Venezuela had the right to expropriate the U.S. oil companies’ interests in its joint ventures with Venezuela. But, it also ruled that Venezuela committed multiple breaches of its trade treaty with Exxon Mobil and failed to abide by internationally-recognized standards of “Fair and Equitable Treatment” in the execution of its expropriation and the amount of compensation it paid. Accordingly, the ICSID ruled that Venezuela should pay Exxon Mobil’s subsidiaries a total of $1.6 billion in compensation for its breaches (emphasis added): “US$ 9,042,482 (nine million, forty two thousand, four hundred and eighty two United States dollars) in compensation for the production and export curtailments imposed on the Cerro Negro project in 2006 and 2007.” “US$ 1,411.7 million (one thousand, four hundred and eleven million, seven hundred thousand United States dollars) in compensation for the expropriation of their investments in the Cerro Negro Project; “US$ 179.3 million (one hundred seventy nine million, three hundred thousand United States dollars) in compensation for the expropriation of their investments in the La Ceiba Project.” The decision also awarded Exxon annual compound interest of 3.25% until Venezuela pays the award in full. To date, the vast majority of the settlement has not been paid.

More than two decades ago, when I started making my tinctures, I found there’s something deeply satisfying about lining up rows of amber bottles filled with herbal extracts you’ve made yourself. It feels like bottling up little bits of plant magic, which, in a way, you are. However, beyond the aesthetic appeal and the satisfaction […]

A 37-year-old Colorado native was fatally shot in Minneapolis on Wednesday while apparently attempting to ram a federal agent with an SUV. Renee Nicole Macklin Good's death and the moments leading up to it were captured on video from multiple angles. Footage clearly shows Good, whose SUV appears to have been strategically stopped to block traffic amid a federal immigration operation, disobeying repeated orders from law enforcement to exit her vehicle, then driving in the direction of the federal agent, who ultimately drew his sidearm and opened fire.'You can accept that this woman's death is a tragedy while acknowledging it's a tragedy of her own making.'The liberal media that rushed five years ago to vilify Ashli Babbitt following her fatal shooting by Michael Byrd at the U.S. Capitol was quick on Wednesday to pen hagiographies about Good, portraying her as a blameless victim of a callous federal agent.The Associated Press — a publication whose relationship with the truth has shown significant signs of strain in recent years — helped bolster this narrative with an article titled, "Woman killed by ICE agent in Minneapolis was a mother of 3, poet and new to the city."The article doesn't bother mentioning that Good tried to ram a federal agent until the eighth paragraph, and even then it insinuates that was how "Trump administration officials painted" the incident.Prior to getting to why the woman may have been killed in front of her lesbian partner, the AP noted:"She was a U.S. citizen born in Colorado and appears to never have been charged with anything involving law enforcement beyond a traffic ticket.""In social media accounts, Macklin Good described herself as a 'poet and writer and wife and mom.' She said she was currently 'experiencing Minneapolis,' displaying a pride flag emoji on her Instagram account.""A profile picture posted to Pinterest shows her smiling and holding a young child against her cheek, along with posts about tattoos, hairstyles and home decorating."After both suggesting Good had simply "pulled forward" when a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent shot her and casting doubt on the Trump administration's characterization of her as a domestic terrorist, the AP made sure that readers knew Good was a "devoted Christian" who "loved to sing."RELATED: Tim Walz says Minnesota is 'at war' with the federal government after fatal ICE shooting Photo by Stephen Maturen/Getty ImagesThe same publication took a markedly different approach when writing about the death of Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt in January 2021, accusing Babbitt of amplifying "false allegations" on social media in the opening sentence of its write-up.While Babbitt may not have been a "poet" like Good, she bravely served her country in Afghanistan and Iraq. The AP glossed over that fact. Instead, the AP focused on Babbitt's social media posts, claiming they were "profane" and contained "unsubstantiated views."The AP is hardly the only publication now painting Good as a martyr after painting Babbitt as a kook or a radical.The difference in approach at NBC News is particularly striking.The title for the network's Jan. 7, 2021, article about Babbitt is "Woman killed in Capitol was Trump supporter who embraced conspiracy theories." The title for its Wednesday article about Good is "Woman fatally shot by ICE agent identified as resident 'out caring for her neighbors.'"Vice President JD Vance said of Good's death on Wednesday, "You can accept that this woman's death is a tragedy while acknowledging it's a tragedy of her own making. Don't illegally interfere in federal law enforcement operations and try to run over our officers with your car. It's really that simple."While Democrats joined the liberal media in ignoring the vice president's advice and characterizing Good as the victim of a malevolent federal agency, President Donald Trump, Vance, and other Republicans defended ICE."I have just viewed the clip of the event which took place in Minneapolis, Minnesota. It is a horrible thing to watch," Trump wrote on Truth Social, "The woman screaming was, obviously, a professional agitator, and the woman driving the car was very disorderly, obstructing and resisting, who then violently, willfully, and viciously ran over the ICE Officer, who seems to have shot her in self defense."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A Louisiana woman has been charged with murder after police said she fatally shot her 1-year-old daughter on New Year's Day.The Sulphur Police Department said a shooting was reported around 8:21 p.m. at a home on Quelqueshue Street. Sulphur is a little over three hours west of New Orleans.'I almost lost two babies. I lost one because her mama wanted to send her to God.'Police said a 1-year-old girl "had been shot and killed."The investigation revealed that the girl was "shot and killed by her mother, Kristin Bass," police said.Officers arrested the 28-year-old mother, and she was charged with first-degree murder. Her bond was set at $10 million.KPLC-TV reported that the slain child's father, Bradley Moss, told investigators he heard a boom and ran into a room to find their 1-year-old daughter shot and Bass holding a gun.Meanwhile, the couple's 2-year-old child was crying for help, according to the station.The father of two reportedly said, "I almost lost two babies. I lost one because her mama wanted to send her to God."Moss added, "[My older daughter] said, 'Help me, daddy.' And Kristin said, 'I just sent our baby to God.'"Moss said Bass then uttered, "Now I gotta get her."RELATED: Stunned judge reveals fate of woman involved in deadly kidnapping of 2 young sisters found in a pit — 1 did not survive Moss identified the shooting victim as Acelynn Moss, according to KPLC.The Louisiana Department of Children and Family Services took custody of the surviving toddler, according to Moss.Police are asking anyone with information regarding the case to contact Sgt. Jeremy Cain at 337-527-4558.Police did not immediately respond to Blaze News' request for comment.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

We have recently seen a renaissance of the terminal, a return to a mode we thought we had left behind. Tech is associated with perpetual progress. What explains this seeming regression?In computing, the new is usually synonymous with the sleek and the visual. The resurgence of the command-line interface, the text-based terminal with its blinking cursor on a monochrome screen, is therefore a development both unexpected and revealing. Developers who spent decades in the comfortable, pixelated embrace of graphical user interfaces are turning to minimalism. This turn is not merely a retreat into nostalgia or a quirk of programmer preference; it is a shift in the cognitive geography between human and machine under the influence of AI.We find ourselves in a 'man-computer symbiosis.'The heart of this revival is the emergence of CLI-based AI agents. These are harnesses for large-language models capable of processing language, writing code, and executing tasks. They have transformed the terminal from a niche tool for the specialist into a versatile assistant for the layman.The CLI is quite a different medium from the GUI. While a GUI is spatial and image-driven, the terminal is rooted in language and sequence. We issue commands to achieve practical ends, a mode of thought that encourages a logical, sequential engagement with the world. We find ourselves in a “man-computer symbiosis,” as J.C.R. Licklider imagined in the 1960s, a partnership where the computer frees human intelligence from the drudgery of mundane tasks. The new AI agents handle the keystrokes and complex syntax, allowing a user to manipulate data as if using a “second brain” integrated directly into his workflow.Sound familiar?The dream of the automated servant is as old as myth. In the "Iliad," Homer describes the “golden handmaidens” of Hephaestus, endowed with movement and perception, who assisted the god at his forge. Aristotle speculated on a world in which the shuttle might weave without a hand to guide it, eliminating the need for human servitude. For most of history, these possibilities remained fantasies. When computers finally arrived in the mid-20th century, they were indeed programmable servants but esoteric ones, requiring punch cards or green-and-black text terminals.By the late 1980s, the mouse-and-icons paradigm of Apple’s Macintosh and Microsoft Windows increased the accessibility of computing. The GUI was more intuitive, an interface that did not require you to memorize arcane commands. The general public grew accustomed to clicking buttons, and the terminal was relegated to the realm of system administrators and developers. The comeback of the terminal in the mid-2020s is therefore significant. The terminal has become the stage where an AI that writes and runs code could operate with freedom. We are returning to Aristotle’s vision: Every user now potentially has a digital apprentice.LLMs are designed to handle text, and the terminal presents the computer’s functions in exactly that form. The CLI is a universal interface, a lingua franca that allows an AI to interact with digital tools without the difficulty of navigating pixel-based GUIs meant for human eyes. Command-line tools possess a Lego-like composability; they can be chained and piped together in ways that GUI applications rarely allow.An AI agent residing in the terminal benefits from a unified environment with low friction, with no need to hunt through menus; it calculates, types, and executes. Developers are moving away from previously dominant integrated development environments to these command-line agents. Whether OpenAI’s Codex CLI, Anthropic’s Claude Code, or community-driven projects like OpenCode, these platforms share a core mechanism: a conversational command-line where the AI interprets instructions and takes actions on the user’s behalf.RELATED: Digital BFF? These top chatbots are HUNGRIER for your affection peshkov / Getty ImagesThe effects are immediate and striking. Tasks that once required specialized training, such as querying databases, deploying websites, and analyzing logs, are now performed by marketing teams and graphic designers who simply ask the agent to do it. Natural language has become a new programming language for the many. There is a rise in “conversational computing” with a “text-first” ethos, a digital minimalism that values the intentionality of a text window over the cacophony of apps and notifications. The terminal also becomes a learning environment: Because the AI explains the commands it generates, a novice can pick up understanding that a closed GUI would hide.Outsourcing problemsYet this shift brings its own set of concerns. When AI tools handle the details, what do we lose? We face the risk of simulated competence in which people “seem to know much, while for the most part they know nothing,” as Socrates described those reliant on writing. Just as writing externalized memory, these agents externalize problem-solving. There is the danger of de-skilling, of losing the ability to troubleshoot or understand underlying concepts, if the AI always mediates the complexity.The hope, of course, is that these tools will let us transcend previous limitations. By automating the drudgery, they might unleash more creativity. The terminal is less anthropomorphic than a voice assistant; it remains a text-based workspace in which the human and the computer engage in a loop of iterative help. The CLI renaissance suggests that looking back to older paradigms, such as text over graphics, can better move us forward. Language is the universal interface of knowledge and may now become the universal interface for action. Whether we use this return to cultivate deeper skills or merely as a productivity hack will shape the society we make. We are left to decide whether we will be sedated by convenience or inspired by new frontiers of art and knowledge.

ALL OF THIS --> Receipt-Filled Thread Legally DISMANTLES Each and Every Lefty Minneapolis Shooting Rant

Tread Reckoning: Stephen A. Smith Says ICE Agent Justified in Minnesota Shooting but Should’ve Shot Tires

So, About Those Minneapolis Protests: Asra Nomani EXPOSES America's Rising 'Red Army' in DAMNING Post