McIver was violent and forcibly interfered with federal law enforcement officers, and now she faces 17 years in prison, but she won’t get anything like that, nor should she. A year would be nice though. A federal grand jury returned a three-count indictment charging Democrat Rep. LaMonica McIver with forcibly impeding and interfering with federal […] The post Dem Rep. McIver “Not Intimidated” by Indictment & 17 Years in Prison appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott announced Tuesday night that he would deploy the National Guard “across the state” as anti-ICE protests hit major cities. Protests against President Donald Trump’s illegal immigration crackdown started earlier this week in Dallas and Austin, and more demonstrations are planned for San Antonio on Wednesday and Saturday. In a post on X, Abbott said he was mobilizing the National Guard as a precautionary measure “to ensure peace & order.” “Peaceful protest is legal. Harming a person or property is illegal & will lead to arrest,” the governor added. “@TexasGuard will use every tool & strategy to help law enforcement maintain order.” In Austin, the state’s capital, police used pepper spray and tear gas to disperse a group of protesters who were ignoring warnings to clear out of the street, KXAN Austin reported. Officers with the Texas Department of Public Safety and the Austin Police Department arrested more than a dozen people during the protest Monday night, according to Abbott. During the demonstration, a federal building where Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) holds detainees was vandalized with messages reading, “ICE NEEDS 2 SURRENDER & RELEASE THE HOSTAGES” and “MODERN DAY SLAVERY DISGUISED AS CRIMINAL REFORM.” Six men arrested during the Austin demonstration were charged with felony criminal mischief, resisting arrest, among other offenses, according to the San Antonio Express-News. “Peaceful protesting is legal. But once you cross the line, you will be arrested,” Abbott wrote on social media early Tuesday morning, adding, “FAFO,” the acronym for “F*** Around and Find Out.” The protest in Dallas on Monday turned “tense” as some demonstrators clashed with police officers, The Dallas Morning News reported. After sunset, authorities deployed pepper spray to disperse the crowd and appeared to make some arrests. Texas National Guard troops will be on “standby in areas where mass demonstrations are planned in case they are needed,” according to Abbott’s office. Demonstrations, organized by a group called “No Kings” are planned for cities in all 50 states on Saturday as the U.S. Army will hold a massive parade in Washington, D.C., coinciding with the president’s birthday, with Trump in attendance. Protests, some of which have turned into riots, have already popped up in cities across the country after anti-ICE rioters attacked law enforcement officers and damaged businesses and public property in Los Angeles last weekend. President Trump deployed the National Guard to L.A. on Saturday and then sent in reinforcements days later, including 700 Marines, as he blasted Democrat officials, including California Gov. Gavin Newsom and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass. California then sued the Trump administration over the National Guard deployment, arguing that Trump infringed on Newsom’s power. Trump has defended his decision, claiming that L.A. would be “burning to the ground” without his action.

A coalition of pro-life groups led by CatholicVote and Nevada Right to Life urged Nevada Republican Governor Joe Lombardo to veto a bill that would mandate a right to in vitro fertilization, saying that the legislation would be ethically and fiscally reckless.  In a letter delivered to Lombardo on Tuesday, nearly two dozen pro-life and Christian organizations asked the Catholic governor to veto SB 217, a Democrat-backed bill that would create a right to IVF and require public and private health insurance companies to cover the procedures. Opponents fear that the bill would shield the IVF industry from any accountability for questionable bioethical practices and cost taxpayers tens of millions of dollars.  “We approach the issue of IVF from varying perspectives. While we are broadly supportive of the general principle of helping families struggling with infertility to conceive, IVF is bioethically and economically problematic. Healthcare must be sensibly regulated,” the pro-life groups wrote in the letter, which was first obtained by The Daily Wire.  In addition to CatholicVote Vice President Josh Mercer, other signatories include Nevada Right to Life Executive Director Melissa Clement, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, Democrats for Life Executive Director Kristen Day, and Moms for America Director Eva Sara Landau. “The IVF industry currently operates in a wild west, with little to no regulation or restraint on its activities. It is already legal in Nevada. The bill would allow IVF practitioners to operate with complete impunity and hinder the state’s ability to enact health and safety regulations to protect women undergoing what is already a physically and mentally taxing process,” the advocates wrote. They added that they appreciated Lombardo’s previous actions to “veto unreasonable and often extreme measures from the legislature.” SB 217, which is also opposed by Nevada’s Republican Party, is estimated to cost at least $38 million in its first two years.  The bill would also put into law that “a fertilized egg or human embryo that exists before implantation in a human uterus is not a person for legal purposes.” Lawmakers across the country have moved to shield the IVF industry after the Alabama Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that frozen embryos should be recognized and protected as children.  Tommy Valentine, director of the Catholic Accountability Project at CatholicVote, told The Daily Wire that SB 217 would allow the IVF industry to operate with virtually no safeguards in place. “This bill would give the industry carte blanche to act recklessly. Let’s not forget that this bill is an unfunded mandate which will cost the state tens of millions of dollars per year and increase healthcare premiums for Nevadans,” he said. “It was passed in literally the 11th hour along party lines. A Republican governor should not be signing a bill like this, and we hope he will not.”

The following article was adapted from a “Morning Wire” interview with “Crain & Company” host David Cone that was released on Wednesday, June 11.  A new era has dawned in the world of college sports. Something that was illegal just a week ago – schools paying players – is now the law of the land.  Last week, a settlement was approved in the case, House vs. NCAA, a class-action lawsuit that claimed the NCAA was illegally limiting the earning potential of college athletes. This agreement ends three separate antitrust lawsuits, and it means schools can now begin paying their athletes directly.  Outkick’s Trey Wallace joined us over at “Crain & Company” earlier this week to lay out how he believes this decision will affect college athletics going forward. Wallace said the settlement will eventually lead to some schools cutting certain sports. “I hate to say it,” Wallace told us. “But you’re gonna see cuts in track and field, rowing, volleyball, mid-major softball programs. You can’t afford them anymore. You’re relying on football to pay the bills.”  With this settlement comes an annual cap, much like a salary cap in professional sports, and it is expected to start at roughly $20.5 million per school in 2025-26. It will then increase every year during the decade-long deal. These new payments are in addition to scholarships and other benefits the athletes already receive. The first checks will be cut on July 1, so schools and conferences need to act quickly and establish the necessary infrastructure to enforce their new rules. And this doesn’t just affect current and future athletes; the NCAA will also pay nearly $2.8 billion in back damages over the next 10 years to athletes who competed in college at any time from 2016 through the present day. In short, this is a shift from name, image, and likeness (NIL) deals student athletes made with companies and collectives to direct pay from the schools. So the cases of O’Bannon vs. NCAA and Alston vs. NCAA paved the way for college athletes to receive NIL money, but those payments were coming from third parties rather than from the athletic programs themselves. This settlement allows schools to share their revenue directly with athletes for the first time, and it also enables programs to create new rules designed to limit the influence of boosters and collectives. Starting this summer, any endorsement deal between a booster and an athlete will be vetted to ensure it’s for a “valid business purpose” rather than a recruiting incentive. Now, what will be interesting to monitor is how each athletic director allocates that $20.5 million between their various sports, as Wallace hinted at in his interview with us. Another thing to watch for is how each program will continue to incorporate NIL deals on top of the revenue-sharing payments. This development still won’t end the debates regarding how long athletes can compete at the college level, and whether or not they should be considered employees who are represented by a union for the purposes of collective bargaining.  However, NCAA president Charlie Baker does believe this will help regulate what has been a very volatile market in college sports. In an open letter posted last Friday, Baker stated, “This is new terrain for everyone. Given the defendant conferences’ new ownership of complicated pieces of rulemaking and enforcement, there will be a transition period and certainly bumps in the road. Opportunities to drive transformative change don’t come often to organizations like ours. It’s important we make the most of this one. We have accomplished a lot over the last several months, from new health and wellness and academic requirements to a stronger financial footing. Together, we can use this new beginning to launch college sports into the future, too.”

'This is literally a Tale of Two Cities'

'This is a distraction'

Another day, another leftist spewing nonsense

Now, illegal migrants from Mexico are supposed to be extended the same privileges as the Apache or Cherokee

'came in well below expectations'