In a move that has halted the cheap hauls of TikTok’s hoard of fashion influencers, President Donald Trump has effectively put fast fashion out of style in the United States. As of May 2, 2025, the Republican president killed the de minimis exemption that allowed Chinese retailer Shein to get away with selling inexpensive clothes to U.S. consumers. Gone are the days of giddy American girls ensnared by Shein’s business model marketing $3 shirts with graphic text gibberish and decals that disappear with two washes. Now, Shein is forced to take Trump’s tariffs into account if they wish to continue business beyond their forgone loophole in the Land of the Free. A Bipartisan Fashion Statement? Ironically, the Trump administration’s move aligns with long-standing concerns from both sides of the political spectrum about the environmental and ethical impacts of fast fashion. Democrats and leftists have lobbed criticism at foreign companies like Shein for their unsustainable practices and labor violations. In April 2023, the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission’s (USCC) issue brief revealed damning allegations about the Chinese company’s forced labor, health hazards, environmental impact, and copyright infringement. The U.S. congressional commission also flagged Shein for “avoiding tariff and customs inspections.” The USCC found that Shien’s U.S. dominance was “aided by exploitation of favorable import regulations, especially the high de minimis threshold for U.S. customs inspections and tariffs.” These findings amplified Shein’s bad press, and the Chinese fast fashion giant recruited several American Gen Z influencers to tour some of its manufacturing facilities in Guangzhou as damage control. The goal of Shein’s malevolent marketers was to propagate the fabricated narrative to its large U.S. consumer base that reports of child labor abuses were to be ignored — but the social media response was hopping mad. So-called Shein “confidence activist” Dani Carbonari scrubbed the Internet of her Instagram post claiming the Chinese company was “fighting with all of their power to not only show us the truth but to continue to improve and be the best they can possibly be.” Other influencers who faced immediate infamy also lacked confidence in their glowing reviews of Shein’s operations, such as Destene Suddeth, who claimed in a since-deleted video that she was “pleasantly surprised” to find that she did not directly bear witness to young Chinese people “slaving away” at the factory. Trump’s #SheinOverHaul Most online users expressed outrage not only at the troubling reports of child labor linked to Shein’s supply chain but also at the environmental devastation wrought by the fast fashion industry as a whole. Social media feeds, once dominated by #SheinHaul videos, began filling with critical posts and exposés about the staggering volume of clothing waste the company’s low-cost model encouraged. Many pointed out that the cheaply made garments often lasted only a few wears before being tossed — contributing to an estimated millions of tons of textile waste dumped into U.S. landfills each year. Despite the overwhelming evidence and the public backlash, some may be surprised to see real policy action come not from progressive lawmakers but from Trump himself. And while the president’s move has effectively dismantled a critical part of Shein’s exploitative pipeline, progressive commentators have been notably quiet, even hesitant, to claim it as a win. Some Shein haul influencers have even doubled down on their fast fashion pursuits, stockpiling caches of cheap Chinese goods in anticipation of Trump’s tariffs. For many on the left, it’s an uncomfortable irony that it took Trump — long criticized for his own environmental and labor record — to do what countless petitions, exposés, and online activists failed to: hit fast fashion where it hurts, in its bottom line. READ MORE from Julianna Frieman: MSNBC’s Attacks on Pete Hegseth Are Not About Trump — It’s About Fox News Donald Trump Dines With Both Sides as Kamala Leaves the Table Julianna Frieman is a writer based in North Carolina. She graduated from the University of North Carolina with a degree in Political Science. She is pursuing her master’s degree at the University of Florida. Her work has been published by the Daily Caller, The American Spectator, and The Federalist. Follow her on X at @juliannafrieman. The post #SheinOverHaul: Trump’s Latest Move Puts Fast Fashion Out of Style appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

In the 20th century, communism arrived via drab uniforms, five-year plans, and gulags. Today, it arrives via soft slogans and social media campaigns. Its weapons are no longer rifles and red flags but influencer campaigns, fellowship programs, and university-backed curricula. The battlefield is the minds of the young. One of its most powerful players is the Club of Rome, with Penn State University (PSU) acting as a campus incubator. Founded in 1968 by Italian industrialist Aurelio Peccei and Scottish scientist Alexander King, the Club of Rome is a powerful and well-connected group that has shaped global policy for decades. It was designed to coordinate elite responses to what it framed as global crises. These crises, it’s worth noting, were — and still are — often ecological in nature and always carry real economic consequences. The group gained global recognition with its infamous 1972 report, “The Limits to Growth,” which predicted societal collapse due to overpopulation and resource exhaustion. As exposed in The Club of Rome: The Think Tank of the New World Order by John Coleman, the group is far more than a gathering of anxiety-ridden intellectuals. It functions as an elite-guided engine for global transformation, merging technocratic planning with post-Marxist doctrine. Coleman warned that the Club’s real aim was the demolition of national sovereignty, curtailing economic freedom, and reconditioning youth into compliant agents of systemic change. What was once dismissed as conspiratorial is now presented in clear language on the group’s official websites and in its “educational” materials. Take the Club’s “Young Person’s Guidebook to Systems Change,” which is essentially a manifesto crafted to reshape how young people view capitalism, society, and themselves. The guide portrays capitalism not merely as flawed but as evil, a parasitic force sustained by contemptible concepts like independence, individualism, and meritocracy.  (RELATED: The Fall of Harvard: How America’s Oldest University Became Its Most Expensive Liability) The authors argue that capitalism has “mastered the art of adaptation,” labeling it a chameleon that can absorb any challenge and commodify every aspect of society. Young readers are told that their “survival of the fittest” mindset is not only outdated but harmful, and that individual pursuit must be replaced by communal “we-ness,” a collectivist creed designed to override selfhood. Then, there’s the 50 Percent, the Penn State-backed youth wing of this ideological operation. Marketed as a vehicle for youth empowerment, it is in reality a training ground for ideological uniformity. Through its flagship “Storytelling for Systems Change” fellowship, young people are taught not to question power structures but to reframe them in favor of collectivism. Fellows are equipped not with tools for critical thinking, but with pre-approved scripts that portray capitalism as the root of all modern afflictions, including inequality, climate collapse, and alienation. The 50 Percent blurs the line between education and re-education, grooming participants to adopt systems thinking in line with elite-sanctioned goals. “Capacity-building” sessions are framed around solving complex problems, but only within an ideologically pre-defined sandbox. Even political engagement is steered through curated policy consultations, producing “knowledge” not through open inquiry, but through guided consensus. The effect is clear: impressionable students are being turned into ideological vessels. The contradiction is, for lack of a better word, staggering. Students, some of whom pay up to $40,000 per year, are subsidizing their own ideological programming. Without capitalism, they wouldn’t be at Penn State to begin with. Yet they are taught to see it as the disease, and communist-friendly collectivism as the cure. Forget higher learning. This is higher programming. It gets worse. The Club has a decades-long relationship with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where “The Limits to Growth” was developed in collaboration with the Systems Dynamics group. Often celebrated as a hub of scientific innovation, MIT has quietly served as one of the Club’s earliest launchpads into American academia, collaborating on everything from simulation models to sustainability workshops. That same blueprint is now being scaled to other campuses, with Penn State as a key node in the next phase of expansion. The packaging may have changed — no longer jackboots and propaganda posters — but the objective remains the same: to remake the world by capturing the minds of its youth. And they’re succeeding. The Club’s graduates have helped seed the degrowth movement, called for the abolition of private property, and pushed for radical policies like climate lockdowns. What seems grassroots is actually a top-down exercise, engineered, orchestrated, and marketed with the sophistication of a Fortune 500 campaign. The result is a generation being trained to see freedom as dangerous, property as theft, and self-determination as selfishness. These aren’t values. Not American values, anyway. They’re viral ideas, memes deployed in the service of soft authoritarianism. Today, Americans are rightly alarmed by the rise of DEI bureaucracies, pronoun mandates, and ideological loyalty oaths. But while attention is fixed on the visible surface, a deeper and arguably more dangerous current surges beneath, one that seeks not just to adjust policy but to reprogram reality itself. This is a resource-rich, highly coordinated assault on liberty. It must be confronted with the moral seriousness it deserves. READ MORE from John Mac Ghlionn: Is Post Malone a Good Role Model? Will This Director Save James Bond or Bury Him for Good? This Man Is Not the Answer to the Masculinity Crisis The post Beyond DEI: How a Top US University Became a Marxist Factory appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Unreal. So, President Trump is planning for the decidedly traditional military parade in Washington on June 14. That date, of course, is Flag Day. But by the sheerest of coincidences that is also the 250th anniversary of the United States Army. And yes, yes indeed, June 14 is also the president’s birthday. Pass the smelling salts. Leave it to — but of course! — the Associated Press to run this headline: “Army plans for a potential parade on Trump’s birthday call for 6,600 soldiers, AP learns.” It is, apparently, necessary to point out to the anti-Trumpers at the AP a couple of obvious realities. First, every human on the planet has a birthday. And it’s always — 100% of the time — a day they did not choose. Trump did not choose Flag Day as his birthday. And to the historical point? Flag Day has a long, long, very long history of being celebrated by Americans, including presidents of the United States. Not to mention that, all by itself, the 250th anniversary of the decidedly historic United States Army is something for Americans to celebrate. The Army’s own website headlines: “Army prepares to celebrate its 250th birthday on June 14, 2025.” My own late Dad served in the Army in World War II — you bet he deserves a parade! The U.S. Army has been around protecting and serving Americans for 250 years, dating from June 14, 1775 — of course, they deserve a parade! Over here at the U.S. military’s site, there is a history of Flag Day. Among other things, it notes:  The first celebration of the U.S. Flag’s birthday was held in 1877, on the 100th anniversary of the Flag Resolution of 1777. However, it is believed that the first annual recognition of the flag’s birthday dates to 1885 when schoolteacher BJ Cigrand organized a group of Wisconsin students to observe June 14, the 108th anniversary of the official adoption of The Stars and Stripes as the Flag’s Birthday. Cigrand, now known as the Father of Flag Day, continued to publicly advocate the observance of June 14 as the flag’s birthday, or “Flag Day,” for years. Just a few years later, the efforts of another teacher, George Balch, led to the formal observance of Flag Day on June 14 by the New York State Board of Education. Over the next few years, as many as 36 state and local governments adopted the annual observance. For over 30 years, Flag Day remained a state and local celebration. Then it goes on to record this, bold print for emphasis supplied: Today, Flag Day is celebrated with parades, essay contests, ceremonies and picnics sponsored by veterans groups, schools, and groups like the National Flag Day foundation whose goal is to preserve the traditions, history, pride, and respect that are due the nation’s symbol, Old Glory. In short, the idea of going all out to celebrate Flag Day on June 14, replete with parades, is an old — very old — tradition. Which is to say, Flag Day parades have been around long, long before President Donald Trump. The fact that Trump’s birthday — not to mention the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army — is June 14 is the sheerest and most obvious of coincidences. Is the president celebrating the day with a traditional Flag Day parade? Well, of course! And if the president were of a mind to get out of Washington for the day? Here’s a decidedly incomplete list of where he could go to celebrate with a Flag Day Parade: Appleton, Wisconsin — Appleton will be hosting “America’s Biggest and Best Flag Day Parade Since 1950!” Hudson, New York — 2025 30th Anniversary Celebration Hudson Flag Day Festival on Saturday June 14th, 2025 Three Oaks, Michigan — “From its humble beginnings in 1953 to becoming the nation’s largest Flag Day parade, this timeline highlights the key moments that have shaped this cherished tradition.” La Mesa, California — “The La Mesa Flag Day Parade is a cherished annual tradition that celebrates our nation’s colors and spirit of patriotism. Since its inception in 1997, the parade has become a beloved community event, featuring vibrant floats, marching bands, and local groups.” Suffice it to say, there are examples aplenty like those above, all in this or that community somewhere across America, where big, colorful, and decidedly patriotic parades are being held. With salutes to the Army’s 250th as well. Washington, D.C., of course, is the nation’s capital. Of course, the city will have a huge Flag Day parade and be celebrating the Army. And not for the first time. As someone who lived in Washington for a considerable time, I have seen all manner of colorful and large parades march through the streets of Washington, marching down the city’s broad, historic streets and winding around the city’s famous monuments to Founding Fathers or historic events. The notion that the Flag Day parade should be scrubbed because it falls, by sheer accident, on President Trump’s birthday is nothing more than yet another example of the pitiful Trump Derangement Syndrome at work. And the fact that there are those recoiling at the military aspects of this parade — a parade replete with Army soldiers and Army tanks celebrating the Army — says nothing about the flag or the Army, but about them. Shocking. Not. READ MORE from Jeffrey Lord: The Democrats’ War on Democracy Trump’s 100-Day Triumph Dr. Oz to the Medicare Advantage Rescue The post Yes, Flag Day Is Trump’s Birthday — and the Army’s 250th Anniversary appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

The newly appointed Catholic Archbishop of Washington, D.C., Cardinal Robert McElroy, has been one of President Trump’s harshest critics. On Feb. 9, 2025, during a prayer service for immigrants at San Diego’s St. Joseph’s Cathedral, the Cardinal described the Trump administration’s attempts to deport criminal immigrants as waging a “war of fear and terror.” Delivering his angry remarks the week before he was to begin his papal assignment in Washington, D.C., Cardinal McElroy has taken every opportunity to condemn the Trump administration for what he called the “massive and indiscriminate deportation” of immigrants. Demanding that those in attendance tell the Trump administration to “Go no further” in what he has described as an “indiscriminate campaign to bring fear into the hearts of every undocumented person, man, woman, mother, child, family in our society,” the Cardinal called on all Catholics to organize against the deportation policies of the current administration. (RELATED: What Cardinal McElroy Gets Wrong on Immigration) Organized by the San Diego Organizing Project (SDOP), an affiliate of Faith in Action — a Soros-supported organization that describes itself as “the largest U. S. and global faith-based grassroots organizing network” — the prayer service at St. Joseph’s Cathedral and the march that followed had all the hallmarks of its progressive parent organization, Faith in Action. (RELATED: Presidential Medal of Freedom to George Soros) Formerly known to Catholics as the progressive PICO Network, Faith in Action describes itself as a “non-partisan, grassroots, faith-based organizing network that works with congregations of all denominations and faith to address issues like racism, economic inequality and social justice.” The truth is that Faith in Action advocates for progressive policies, including full citizenship for undocumented immigrants, universal health care, criminal justice reform, voter mobilization through “Rise + Vote,” and other leftist initiatives. The Lepanto Institute has provided evidence that Faith in Action has lobbied for “expanding access to full reproductive rights.”  Today, the SDOP proudly displays a photo of Cardinal McElroy on its homepage. In his collaboration with Faith in Action’s San Diego Organizing Project, Cardinal McElroy engaged in the kind of organizing model developed by Saul Alinsky of the Industrial Areas Foundation. The central component of this model — which has been used by SDOP for decades — is to “challenge” and “hold accountable” through the use of political tension, external actors including prominent politicians like President Trump or wealthy local business people identified by SDOP as exploiting the poor or discouraging unionization in their companies. It was no surprise to those of us who know of the Marxist tactics of these “grassroots” projects to see that the huge banner of the San Diego Organizing Project was prominently displayed on the altar of St. Joseph’s Cathedral adjacent to the ambo (the stationary podium specifically designed for proclaiming scripture and delivering the homily) where Cardinal McElroy stood flanked by two sacred candles adjacent to the banner. During the 1990s, the University of San Diego’s Center for Social Research (the Center that I founded and directed from 1993 until 2007) received a million-dollar Federal Housing and Urban Development (HUD) grant to address housing affordability in the Linda Vista neighborhood of San Diego. We enlisted the help of the San Diego Organizing Project to assist with the delivery of services in landlord-tenant mediation. However, tensions emerged when SDOP began to use Alinsky-like tactics like bringing busloads of Linda Vista residents to protest in front of the homes of those they defined as “absentee landlords” living in La Jolla or other elite neighborhoods in San Diego County. The tactic was to embarrass the landlords in front of their affluent neighbors as a way to coerce them to lower the apartment rental prices for residents. With his move to the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C., Cardinal McElroy will have an ally in his war against the Trump administration through the corporate offices of SDOP’s parent organization, Faith in Action. The new executive director of Faith in Action, based in D.C., Bishop Dwayne Royster, shares many of Cardinal McElroy’s goals, having been the executive director of POWER Interfaith of Pennsylvania, where he led a number of social justice campaigns. According to Faith in Action, Royster brings a range of experience, including pastoring Black congregations in Philadelphia and Washington, D.C., founding the Society for Faith and Justice, serving as a local elected official in Pennsylvania, and working as the Faith in Action political director on Capitol Hill. As pastor of Living Water Church in Philadelphia, Bishop Royster bragged that his Church was inclusive: “Half of the congregation is lesbian, bisexual and transgender and as a congregation, we are allied with that community. We believe we are created in the likeness of God and we don’t have the right to judge each other that way.” An alliance with Faith in Action is a risky one for Cardinal McElroy in the nation’s capital. It is one thing to ally with Faith in Action’s SDOP in San Diego to attack the Trump administration in such vitriolic terms as he exhibited last February, but it is quite another to create a bully pulpit in Washington, D.C.’s Cathedral of St. Matthew the Apostle to defame the President and his Cabinet. READ MORE from Anne Hendershott: JD Vance Knows That Catholic Charities Has Lost Its Soul Super Bowl Ad: We Know ‘He Gets Us’ but Others May Not The post Washington DC Cardinal McElroy Creates Confusion Over Immigration appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

WASHINGTON — I’ve been having flashbacks about Unabomber Ted Kaczynski, who killed three innocent people and wounded 23 during a 17-year killing spree. In 1998, Kaczynski pleaded guilty and agreed to a sentence of life without parole. He killed himself in 2023. It turns out Luigi Mangione, who stands accused of killing UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson last year by shooting him in the back on a New York City sidewalk, is a fan of Kaczynski. Mangione, who has pleaded not guilty to a federal murder charge as well as stalking charges, is expected to go to trial next year. (RELATED: Luigi Mangione’s Cognitive Dissonance) Mangione, 26, gave a four-star review to the Unabomber’s 35,000-word manifesto, “Industrial Society and Its Future.” “It’s easy to quickly and thoughtless write this off as the manifesto of a lunatic, in order to avoid facing some of the uncomfortable problems it identifies. But it’s simply impossible to ignore how prescient many of his predictions about modern society turned out,” Mangione wrote on Goodreads. “He was a violent individual — rightfully imprisoned — who maimed innocent people,” Mangione added. “While these actions tend to be characterized as those of a crazy luddite, however, they are more accurately seen as those of an extreme political revolutionary.” Apparently, Mangione sees himself as a fellow big thinker. The Unabomber story is personal for me. Kaczynski murdered Gilbert Murray, president of the California Forestry Association, and the colleague of a friend. The bomb that killed Murray in 1995 had been sitting on a receptionist’s desk before the timber lobbyist carried the package into his office. Also, when I was a columnist for the San Francisco Chronicle, the FBI went through my reader hate mail in the hope that the Unabomber might have written to me. As far as I know, he did not. At the time, investigators were convinced that the serial killer lived near the Bay Area — not Montana, where he was living. But Kaczynski had lived in the Bay Area when he was a tenure-track mathematics professor at UC-Berkeley. Investigators got his residency wrong, but they were creative in their attempts to identify a man who, I learned from Eric Benson’s podcast Project Unabom, wrote in a journal that he would kill people if there was “very little chance of getting caught.” So rather than admire the serial killer’s banal critique of modern society, I look at what he did, as reported in Project Unabom. In 1979, he planted a bomb that detonated during an American Airlines flight with 80 passengers. The plane did not crash, but some passengers suffered from smoke inhalation. He applied for welfare while law enforcement was trying to solve the case. When he pleaded guilty and was sentenced to life without parole, he refused to apologize. He shot a neighbor’s cow in the head. In 1985, he achieved his first kill, Sacramento computer store owner Hugh Scrutton. He put a wire across a road near his Lincoln, Montana, home because he didn’t like motorcycles. He wrote three autobiographies. In the second, he said he was going to start killing people. He never forgave his brother David for getting married. He told David that most really smart people have a sadistic streak. He was thinking about dating and starting a family after he placed his 12th bomb. At the age of 50, he was accepted as a journalism major at the University of Montana. In 1978, his first bomb blew up in a security guard’s hands. This is the man whose manifesto Mangione finds “prescient.” But really, the manifesto is a hater’s rant, a conceit to dress up the desire to kill other people and cause pain. READ MORE from Debra J. Saunders: Marco Rubio Says Uncle Sam Is Monitoring Social Media. Who Doesn’t Believe Him? Trump’s Tariff Plan — It’s Not Working Yet Democrats’ Hill to Die On: Illegal Immigrant Abrego Garcia Contact Review-Journal Washington columnist Debra J. Saunders at dsaunders@reviewjournal.com. Follow @debrajsaunders on X. COPYRIGHT 2025 CREATORS.COM The post Memo to Mangione: Read the Unabomber Obituaries. Not the Manifesto. appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

How does it feel to be one of the beautiful people? An ugly soul oversaw the collection of pretty people last night at the Met Gala in Manhattan Diana Ross wore a train larger than a train, Sabrina Carpenter attracted stares in a pantless brown bodysuit with tails, surprise guest Kamala Harris looked like a half-moon cookie in her black-and-white outfit, and Emma Chamberlain stunned in a pinstriped suit repurposed as a dress. Though themed as “Superfine: Tailoring Black Style,” the event lacked arguably the fashion industry’s most famous black model, Naomi Campbell. Whoopi Goldberg invited the president of the United States to “let him try to get rid of us” while speaking on the red carpet. Colin Kaepernick, who last played a down in the NFL more than eight years ago, was there. Campbell was not. Some reports claimed that Anna Wintour issued a ban on Campbell after a tiff last year in which the former insulted the latter (and the latter responded in kind) despite presenting her for an honor. Campbell later clarified that she was invited but just could not make it. Hmmm. Wintour, who put Jill Biden, Kamala Harris, Hillary Clinton, and Michelle Obama on the cover of Vogue but blocked First Lady Melania Trump despite her appearance in the magazine as an actual model years earlier, holds grudges. Her portrayal as a small, petty woman in the roman à clef transformed into the movie The Devil Wears Prada reflects her nasty reputation. Whether or not she rolled out the unwelcome mat for Campbell — at an event celebrating African-American fashion, no less — seems up for debate. Wintour openly boasted of a ban on Donald Trump, long ago a perennial attendee of the event, once he became president in 2017. Tim Gunn, a major figure in the world of fashion design, similarly became persona non grata. When asked about the most incredible sight he has seen in his years in fashion, Gunn answered, “watching Anna Wintour being carried down five flights of stairs by two bodyguards — two big hulking men — from a fashion show.” This removed him from the guest list. They make her “naughty” list. Who made the “nice” list? Jeffrey Epstein regularly attended. So did Harvey Weinstein. Sean “P. Diddy” Combs conspicuously went to the party just about every year for decades. Why did Anna Wintour roll out the red carpet for them but hang a velvet rope for Donald Trump, Tim Gunn, Naomi Campbell, and others? Because superficial people do not care how one treats other people. They care only about how one makes them feel. Shocker: a woman immersed in a field obsessed with looks exhibits profound superficiality. If you can cough up the money — a table started at $350,000 and a single ticket went for $75,000 last night — look decent, and not annoy Anna Wintour, you can attend. The photographic evidence of #MeToo creeps attending in the past proves this. If, on the other hand, you vote the wrong way, or said something Anna Wintour dislikes, a ban awaits. Last night, in a bit of karmic revenge, a stain appeared on Anna Wintour’s dress. The dress, like Dorian Gray’s portrait, surely said something about the soul to whom it belonged. Tina Fey, who attended many years ago, summed up the event best by describing the Met Gala as a “jerk parade.” Anna Wintour is the grand marshal. READ MORE from Daniel J. Flynn: David Horowitz Leaves Us Just As We Need Him Now More Than Ever Trump’s De Facto Election Interference Ensured the Left’s Victory in Canada None Dare Call It Blackmail The post Beautiful Clothes Hide Ugly Souls at the Met Gala appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

As the cardinals of the Catholic Church prepare to enter the Sistine Chapel Wednesday to choose the next pope, a surprising dynamic has emerged. One cardinal has made comments about his African confrères that are difficult to interpret in a light other than that of racism. In an interview with the New York Times, Canadian Cardinal Michael Czerny made the baffling statements. He said, “I can think of some African cardinals — they make me shudder.” In the most charitable reading, the New York Times could have divorced this sentence from the fuller context of Czerny’s statements. But, as it is, this quote reads as though Cardinal Czerny is saying he feels reproach for cardinals from one particular continent. It’s a sad thing to hear as cardinals from all over the world seek to unite around one man to lead the Church. (RELATED: Papabile Stresses Need for a Holy Pope) The New York Times reports that it then asked Czerny “whether conservatives were rallying behind an African pope as a Trojan Horse to further their agenda.” Czerny’s response seemed to give full agreement to the notion that African cardinals are acting as mere pawns for conservative Western cardinals to control. He said, “Certainly, certainly, certainly, and that’s why it’s so, so, so stupid to say things like Africa’s time has come.” The cardinal has not publicly apologized. However, after the New York Times article went to press, an interview with Czerny was published in America magazine that gave a much less disconcerting reason for Czerny’s belief that it’s “stupid” to say it’s time for an African pope. In this America interview, Czerny said: “I become agitated when they say it’s time for an American, it’s time for an African, it’s time for a South Islander. I think that is so stupid. It’s time for the successor of Peter for 2025.” In this explanation, Czerny reasons that the focus should be on the qualities of the man chosen, rather than, as he does in the New York Times interview, portraying calls for an African pope as a ruse for rolling back Pope Francis’s reforms. The author of the America article reported that this interview was conducted on April 30, which would have been prior to the New York Times interview. Cardinal Czerny has been quite outspoken with the media in the lead-up to the conclave, having spoken to the New York Times, CNN, and CBS News. In several of his interviews, he has portrayed calls for unity in the Church as a smokescreen for turning away from Pope Francis’s reforms. In an interview with the New York Times last week, for instance, Czerny said unity “sounds really good,” but “it means reversal.” (RELATED: Some Progressive Cardinals Express Displeasure With Pre-Conclave Meetings) Cardinal Czerny’s statement that some African cardinals “make [him] shudder” comes as prelates from that continent are set to play a greater role in the conclave than in years past. On Wednesday, 17 cardinal electors from Africa will enter the conclave — up from the 11 African cardinals who voted in 2013. Still, Africa will remain proportionally underrepresented in the conclave, as Sub-Saharan Africans constitute 19 percent of the global church, yet only 12 percent of cardinal electors, according to the Pew Research Center. Apart from being offensive, Czerny’s portrayal of African papabili as a Trojan horse for conservatives is simply not accurate. Cardinals from Africa discussed as potential candidates for the papacy represent the full breadth of the Church. Cardinal Peter Turkson of Ghana gives priority to social justice issues; Cardinal Cristóbal López Romero of Algeria gives priority to interfaith dialogue and the plight of migrants; and Cardinal Fridolin Ambongo Besungu of the Democratic Republic of the Congo emphasizes pastoral care, yet also led the opposition to blessings of same-sex couples. Cardinal Robert Sarah, a theological conservative from Guinea who was considered a papabile in 2013, is not conventionally considered to have a legitimate possibility of being elected pope in this conclave. Additionally, Cardinal Jean-Marc Aveline of Marseille, France, who is believed to be one of Pope Francis’s preferred successors, was born in Algeria. Also, French Cardinal Dominique Mamberti, who is considered to be a moderate, was born in Morocco. Perhaps Czerny was shuddering at Cardinal Fridolin Ambongo Besungu, who is probably the most conservative of the African papabili. Ambongo Besungu is far from one-dimensional; he was on Pope Francis’s Council of Cardinals and benefited from the pope’s favor. He has long stressed peace, environmentalism, and opposition to Western exploitation of Africa. At the same time, he led the effort among the African bishops to put out a statement titled “No blessing for homosexual couples in the African churches” — with the permission of Pope Francis. Ambongo Besungu also has a history of denouncing Western cultural decadence and moral decay. In recent days, it has been speculated that conservative cardinals from the Global South are rallying around Ambongo Besungu, even as Western conservative cardinals “remain unconvinced.” In other words, Ambongo Besungu, whose diocese includes a huge six million Catholics, is not some limp figure propped up by Western conservatives. Or perhaps Czerny was shuddering at other African cardinals who are taking part in the conclave or simply the general congregations. This could include the 79-year-old Cardinal Sarah, who served as the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments under Pope Francis. In 2016, Sarah published a book titled The Power of Silence; in it, the cardinal calls silence “the indispensable doorway to the divine.” Regardless of who exactly Czerny had in mind when he said African cardinals were making him shudder, one would think that the 17 cardinal electors from Africa, particularly those from Sub-Saharan Africa, would be reticent to join an alliance led by Cardinal Czerny, given his comments. In fact, it’s possible that Cardinal Czerny’s comments could embolden those from the Global South who favor the election of Cardinal Ambongo Besungu. On Tuesday morning, the prominent Jesuit priest Father James Martin recorded a video message in front of St. Peter’s Basilica to address “the poisonous attacks that have happened in the last couple of days.” He listed as examples of this Cardinal Beniamino Stella’s criticisms of Pope Francis in one of the general congregations, Cardinal Gerhard Müller’s calling Pope Francis a “dictator,” news stories that claimed Cardinal Pietro Parolin had fainted in a general congregation, and comments made about Cardinal Luis Tagle’s singing of John Lennon’s Imagine. Father Martin did not mention Cardinal Czerzy’s assertion that some African cardinals make him “shudder,” but Father Martin’s statement that “Even through these sinful people, the Holy Spirit is at work, right? So, we have to continue to pray, even in the midst of these stories, for the cardinal electors” could apply all the same. READ MORE from Ellie Gardey Holmes: Report: All the Cardinals Are Talking About Pizzaballa Some Progressive Cardinals Express Displeasure With Pre-Conclave Meetings Papabile Stresses Need for a Holy Pope The post Derisive Comments Toward African Cardinals Throw Twist Into Conclave appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Mudvyne will be on the road this year celebrating the 25th anniversary of their debut album, “L.D. 50,“ with late summer/early fall U.S. tour. The ’00 album was certified gold by the RIAA for shipments in excess of half a million copies in the U.S. alone. Static X and Vended will provide support. “L.D. 50 25th Anniversary” Tour Dates: Ticket Information Sep. 11 – Dubuque, IA – Q Casino @ Back Waters StageSep. 13 – Waukee, IA @ Vibrant Music HallSep. 14 – Chicago, IL @ Byline Bank Aragon BallroomSep. 17 – Youngstown, OH @ The Covelli CentreSep. 20 – Chesterfield, MO @ The FactorySep. 21 – Omaha, NE @ Steelhouse OmahaSep. 23 – Denver, CO @ Fillmore AuditoriumSep. 24 – Albuquerque, NM @ Revel Entertainment CenterSep. 26 – Las Vegas, NV @ The PearlSep. 27 – Phoenix, AZ @ Arizona Financial TheatreSep. 28 – Los Angeles, CA @ Hollywood PalladiumSep. 30 – Portland, OR @ Theater of the CloudsOct. 1 – Airway Heights, WA @ Northern Quest AmphitheaterOct. 7 – Salt Lake City, UT @ The Union Event CenterOct. 11 – Dallas, TX @ South Side BallroomOct. 12 – San Antonio, TX @ Boeing Center at Tech Port Mudvyne Oct. 13 – Houston, TX @ Bayou Music CenterOct. 18 – Nashville, TN @ Nashville Auditorium Oct. 19 – Atlanta, GA @ Coca-Cola RoxyOct. 21 – Raleigh, NC @ The Red Hat AmphitheaterOct. 22 – Virginia Beach, VA @ The DomeOct. 24 – Montclair, NJ @ The Wellmont TheaterOct. 25 – Boston, MA @ MGM Music Hall at FenwayOct. 26 – Uncasville, CT @ Mohegan Sun Arena General on-sale will be Friday, May 9th at 10 a.m. local time. Mudvyne formed in ’96 and has sold over six million records worldwide, earning gold certifications for three albums – “L.D. 50,” “The End Of All Things To Come” (’02) and “Lost And Found” (’05). ### The post Mudvyne’s “L.D. 50” Tour appeared first on RockinTown.

This is how methylene blue actually works.

Joby Weeks is suing 6 judges, a dozen prosecutors, a dozen lawyers, clerks, the SEC, IRS, FBI and 50 plus agents. $22 BILLION DOLLARS or 222,222 Bitcoins! Who else is doing that? This should be the biggest story in the country. If Americans actually read what I wrote here the entire criminal justice department would collapse. They are completely out of order. We need your help big time on this. The timing is perfect. People need to read what he spent the last 4 years writing. Download here: https://jobyweeks.com/legal-case/ 222,222 Bitcoin ($22.2 B) announcement 25 mins: https://youtu.be/R4iZUA84R1U?feature=shared 2 min announcement: https://x.com/satoshiqq/status/1883172438181048524?s=46 Youtube Sizzle reel: https://youtu.be/x1VnmhM6ZpA?feature=shared TikTok sizzle reel: https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZP8FEmJLW/ X sizzle reel: https://x.com/satoshiqq/status/1883673508850368916?s=46 Petition: Www.FreeJoby.com Goliaths Target: https://economicjournalmag.com/goliaths-target-joby-weeks-and-the-power-of-protest-2/ One man against the system: https://cryptoinsidermag.com/one-man-against-the-system-the-joby-weeks-fight/ Silenced: https://washingtontimesmag.com/silenced-the-joby-weeks-case-and-the-erosion-of-first-amendment-rights/ Speaking Truth: https://bitcoindailymag.com/speaking-truth-to-power-the-persecution-of-joby-weeks/ Justice denied: https://coinweeklymag.com/justice-denied-to-a-bitcoin-pioneer-the-unjust-imprisonment-of-joby-weeks/ Bitcoin mining isn’t a security according to the SEC: https://decrypt.co/311023/bitcoin-dogecoin-crypto-mining-sec Podcast Nino Show: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPix4CyYG90 Podcast Mel Show: https://youtu.be/_ei_Eg0_t-w?si=XZNc28e3LQkT3HrX Podcast Luke Show: https://youtu.be/Bo3Bfg3TgD8?si=RKkw7o2FSl4CWOxV Funding terrorist with tax money: https://x.com/katee_k1/status/1896508232631525672?s=46 18 States Suing the SEC: https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/18-states-sue-sec-over-..