Long before the world even noticed, Vladimir Putin shook the globalist order to its core. He kicked the Rothschilds out of Russia—yes, the very family behind the creation of the modern state of Israel—and declared [...] The post Putin Vows to Destroy “Bloodthirsty” Israel’s Satanic Grip on Washington DC  appeared first on The People's Voice.

President Trump answered the question of revenge when reporters approached him as he headed for Marine One. Reporter: “Who is the next person on your list in this press release?“ Trump: “It’s not a list, but I think there’ll be others. I mean, they’re corrupt. These were corrupt radical left Democrats, because Comey, essentially was, […] The post President Trump answers the question of revenge. appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

The Trump administration filed a lawsuit against six states on Thursday, following the Justice Department’s accusation that they had failed to comply with federal law by refusing to turn over voter registration records.  The Justice Department says that the states have not provided the requested documentation to show that they maintain clean and accurate voter rolls. The lawsuits target Michigan, California, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Minnesota, and New York. “Clean voter rolls are the foundation of free and fair elections,” said Attorney General Pam Bondi. “Every state has a responsibility to ensure that voter registration records are accurate, accessible, and secure — states that don’t fulfill that obligation will see this Department of Justice in court.” The lawsuits allege that the states have violated provisions of the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act, which give the attorney general the authority to inspect states’ voter rolls. As part of the suit, the Justice Department wants records that would include a voter’s driver’s license number or the last four digits of their Social Security number.  “States are required to safeguard American elections by complying with our federal elections laws,” said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “Clean voter rolls protect American citizens from voting fraud and abuse, and restore their confidence that their states’ elections are conducted properly, with integrity, and in compliance with the law.” Michigan Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson responded to the suit by stating that state law prohibits her from disclosing personally identifiable information to the federal government. “States can and must hold the line. Only state and local election officials – not the president, the DOJ, or any other federal agency – have the right to people’s private voter information. The people of Michigan have entrusted this department with their personal data, and I will stand up to this illegal and unconstitutional power grab,” she said.  The other defendant states have made similar arguments, objecting to the release of their residents’ identifying information. Republican National Committee Chair Joe Gruters said that the suit would be “an important step toward restoring confidence in our elections.” “Voters deserve to know that their states are removing ineligible individuals — including the deceased, criminals, out-of-state movers, and non-citizens — from the rolls,” he said.

In a thunderous United Nations address on Friday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu defended the Jewish state and took unprecedented steps to ensure his message was heard in Gaza, including reportedly using the military to take over the mobile phones of Gaza residents to broadcast his speech live. Netanyahu began by highlighting Israeli military successes against Hamas, Hezbollah, the Assad regime in Syria, the Houthis in Yemen, and, above all, Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs. Referring to Hezbollah, he quipped, “Remember those beepers? We paged Hezbollah and believe me, they got the message,” alluding to an operation in which Israeli intelligence rigged pagers as explosives. Referring to a pin on his suit, he suggested, “Ladies and gentlemen, much of the world no longer remembers October 7, but we remember. Israel remembers October 7. On that day, well, I’ll tell you, you can remember October 7, too. See this large pin here? It’s a QR code. What I ask you to do is hold up your phones, zoom in, and you too will see why we fight and why we must win.” “It’s all in here,” he continued. “On October 7, Hamas carried out the worst attack on Jews since the Holocaust. They slaughtered 1,200 innocent people, including over 40 Americans and foreign nationals from dozens of countries represented here. They beheaded men. They raped women. They burned babies alive. They burned babies alive in front of their parents. What monsters! And these monsters took more than 250 people hostage, and those included Holocaust survivors, grandmothers, and their grandchildren.” “Now, ladies and gentlemen, I want to do something I’ve never done before: I want to speak from this forum directly to those hostages through loudspeakers,” he told the audience. “I’ve surrounded Gaza with massive loudspeakers connected to this microphone in the hope that our dear hostages will hear me. And I’ll say it first in Hebrew and then in English. Our brave heroes, this is Prime Minister Netanyahu, speaking to you live from the United Nations. We have not forgotten you, not even for a second. The people of Israel are with you. We will not falter and we will not rest until we bring you all of you home.” “Ladies and gentlemen, thanks to special efforts by Israeli intelligence, my words are now also being carried; they’re streamed live to the cell phones of Gazans. So to the remaining Hamas leaders, and to the jailers of our hostages. I now say: lay down your arms, let my people go. Free the hostages, all of them, the whole 48. Free the hostages now! If you do, you will live. If you don’t, Israel will hunt you down,” he continued. He pointed out that General George Keegan, former head of U. S. Air Force Intelligence, once said, “If the United States had to gather on its own the intelligence that Israel gives us, we would have to establish five CIAs.”  He mentioned that in June, when Israel struck Iran’s nuclear facilities, German Chancellor Merz admitted, “Israel is doing the dirty work for all of us.” “Regrettably, many leaders who are represented in this hall, they send a very different message,” he noted, adding: Sure, in the days immediately following October 7, many of them supported Israel. But that support quickly evaporated when Israel did what any self-respecting nation would do in the wake of such a savage attack: we fought back. Now just imagine, just sit back for a second and imagine: an attack against America proportionate to the attack against Israel on October 7. Imagine a regime, a terror regime, dispatching thousands of terrorists to invade the United States. They massacre 40,000 Americans, they take 10, 000 Americans hostage. What do you think America would do? You think America would leave that regime standing? You don’t think that. No way. Not a chance. The United States would wipe out that terror regime and ensure that such savagery would never threaten America again. This is precisely what Israel is doing in Gaza. We’re wiping out the terror regime of Hamas and ensuring that this savagery will never threaten Israel again. That’s what we are doing. That’s what any self-respecting government would do.  Yet— and it’s a yet that I’m sorry to say here—yet over time many world leaders buckled. They buckled under the pressure of a biased media, radical Islamist constituencies, and anti-Semitic mobs. There’s a familiar saying: When the going gets tough, the tough get going. Well, for many countries here when the going got tough, you caved. And here’s the shameful result of that collapse: For much of the past two years, Israel has had to fight a seven-front war against barbarism, with many of your nations opposing us. After destroying the antisemitic narratives that Israel is committing genocide and starving Palestinians, he said, “Thankfully, President Trump’s administration is forcefully fighting the scourge of antisemitism. And every government here should follow its lead. But instead, many do the opposite. They actually reward, reward the worst anti-Semites on Earth. This week, the leaders of France, Britain, Australia, Canada, and other countries unconditionally recognized a Palestinian state. They did so after the horrors committed by Hamas on October 7, horrors praised on that day by nearly 90% of the Palestinian population. Let me say that again: Nearly 90% of Palestinians supported the attack on October 7. It’s not supported only, they celebrated. They danced on the rooftops. They threw candies. That’s both in Gaza and in Judea/Samaria, the West Bank, as you call it. And it’s just the way they celebrated another horror: 9/11. They danced on the rooftops. They cheered; they threw candy. You know what message the leaders who recognized a Palestinian state this week sent to the Palestinians? It’s a very clear message: murdering Jews pays off. Well, I have a message for these leaders: when the most savage terrorists on Earth are effusively praising your decision, you didn’t do something right; you did something wrong, horribly wrong. Your disgraceful decision will encourage terrorism against Jews and against innocent people everywhere. It will be a mark of shame on all of you.” “What you’re doing is giving the ultimate reward to intolerant fanatics who perpetrated and supported the October 7 massacre. Giving the Palestinians a state one mile from Jerusalem after October 7 is like giving Al Qaeda a state one mile from New York City after September 11,” he said. “This is sheer madness. It’s insane. And we won’t do it.  So here’s another message to those Western leaders: Israel will not allow you to shove a terror state down our throats. We will not commit national suicide because you don’t have the guts to face down a hostile media and anti-Semitic mobs demanding Israel’s blood.” He concluded: The rise of Israel did not mean that the attempts to destroy us would end. It meant that we could fight back against those attempts. And that is exactly what Israel has done since October 7. Our sons and daughters fought like lions. Our brave soldiers donned their uniforms and rushed into battle. They were armed with the dreams of the hundred generations of Jews who came before them: the dream of living as a free people in the land of Israel, our beloved homeland, for more than 3,000 years. The dreams of living in our own independent state, the dream of having an army to defend ourselves, and the dream of being a light unto the nations— a beacon of progress, ingenuity, innovation for the benefit of all humanity. On October 7, the enemies of Israel tried to extinguish that light. Two years later, the resolve of Israel and the strength of Israel burn brighter than ever. With God’s help, that strength and that resolve will lead us to a speedy victory and to a brilliant future of prosperity and peace. Thank you very much. Full transcript below: Mr. President, the families of our dear hostages languishing in the dungeons of Gaza; ladies and gentlemen: Last year I stood at this podium and I showed this this map. It shows the curse of Iran’s terror axis. This axis threatened the peace of the entire world. It threatened the stability of our region and the very existence of my country, Israel. Iran was rapidly developing a massive nuclear weapons program and a massive ballistic missile program. These were meant not only to destroy Israel; they were meant also to threaten the United States and blackmail nations everywhere. From Gaza, Yihya Sinwar dispatched waves of Hamas terrorists. They stormed into Israel on October 7 and committed acts of unspeakable savagery. From Lebanon, Hassan Nasrallah had launched thousands of missiles and rockets at our cities, terrorizing our citizens. In Syria, the murderous dictator Assad hosted Iran’s forces, tightening a noose of death around our throats.  In Yemen, the Houthis launched ballistic missiles at Israel while choking global trade at the mouth of the Red Sea. So what’s happened over the past year? We’ve hammered the Houthis, including yesterday. We crushed the bulk of Hamas’s terror machine. We crippled Hezbollah, taking out most of its leaders and much of its weapons arsenal. Remember those beepers? We paged Hezbollah, and believe me, they got the message. (Cheers) And thousands of terrorists, thousands of terrorists dropped to the ground. We destroyed Assad’s armaments in Syria. We deterred Iran’s Shiite militias in Iraq, and most importantly, and above anything else that I could say to you or that we did in this past year, in this past decade, we devastated Iran’s atomic weapons and ballistic missiles programs. So here’s where things stand today: half the Houthi leadership in Yemen, gone. Yihya Sinwar in Gaza, gone. Hassan Nasrallah in Lebanon, gone. The Assad regime in Syria, gone. Those militias in Iraq? Well, they’re still deterred, and their leaders, if they attack Israel, will also be gone. And for Iran’s top military commanders and its top atomic bomb scientists, well, they’re gone, too. Israel’s 12-day war with Iran, which I renamed Operation Rising Lion—that’s from the Bible—this 12-day war will go down in the annals of military history. Our daring pilots neutralized Iran’s missile defenses and took control of the skies over Tehran. And you saw this: Israeli fighter pilots and American B-2 pilots bombed Iran’s nuclear enrichment sites. I want to thank President Trump for his bold and decisive action. (Cheers.)  President Trump and I promised to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, and we delivered on that promise. We removed an existential threat to Israel and a mortal threat to the civilized world. We lifted a dark cloud that could have claimed millions and millions of lives. But ladies and gentlemen, we must remain vigilant. We must remain absolutely clear-minded and vigilant. We must not allow Iran to rebuild its military nuclear capacities. Iran’s stockpiles of enriched uranium—these stockpiles must be eliminated. And tomorrow, U.N. Security Council sanctions on Iran must be snapped back. (applause) Thanks to the resolve of our people, the courage of our soldiers, and the bold decisions we took, Israel rebounded from its darkest day to deliver one of the most stunning military comebacks in history. (applause) But we’re not done yet. The final elements, the final remnants of Hamas, are holed up in Gaza City. They vow to repeat the atrocities of October 7 again and again and again, no matter how diminished their forces. That is why Israel must finish the job. That is why we want to do so as fast as possible. (applause)   Ladies and gentlemen, much of the world no longer remembers October 7, but we remember. Israel remembers October 7. On that day, well, I’ll tell you, you can remember October 7, too. See this large pin here? It’s a QR code. What I ask you to do is hold up your phones, zoom in, and you too will see why we fight and why we must win. (applause) It’s all in here. On October 7, Hamas carried out the worst attack on Jews since the Holocaust. They slaughtered 1,200 innocent people, including over 40 Americans and foreign nationals from dozens of countries represented here. They beheaded men. They raped women. They burned babies alive. They burned babies alive in front of their parents. What monsters! And these monsters took more than 250 people hostage, and those included Holocaust survivors, grandmothers, and their grandchildren. Who takes hostage grandmothers and grandchildren? Hamas does. So far, we’ve brought home 207 of these hostages, but 48 still remain in the dungeons of Gaza. Twenty of them are alive, starved, tortured, deprived of any daylight. Deprived of humanity. These are the names of the 20 living hostages: Matan Angrist, Gali and Ziv Berman, brothers Elkanah Bochbot, Rom Braslavsky, Nimrod Cohen, Ariel and David Cuno, another pair of brothers, Guy Gilboa, Dalal Eviatar, David. You saw the picture of Eviatar David, emaciated, forced to dig his own grave. Maxim Herkin, Eitan Horn, Segev Kalfon, Bar Cooperstein, Omri Mehran, Eitan Moore, Yosef Chaim Ohana, Alon Ohel, Avinatam Oh, and Matan Tsengarkar. Now, ladies and gentlemen, I want to do something I’ve never done before: I want to speak from this forum directly to those hostages through loudspeakers. I’ve surrounded Gaza with massive loudspeakers connected to this microphone in the hope that our dear hostages will hear me. And I’ll say it first in Hebrew and then in English. Our brave heroes, This is Prime Minister Netanyahu, speaking to you live from the United Nations. We have not forgotten you, not even for a second. The people of Israel are with you. We will not falter, and we will not rest until we bring you all of you home. Ladies and gentlemen, thanks to special efforts by Israeli intelligence, my words are now also being carried; they’re streamed live to the cell phones of Gazans. So to the remaining Hamas leaders, and to the jailers of our hostages. I now say: lay down your arms, let my people go. Free, the hostages, all of them, the whole 48. Free the hostages now! If you do, you will live. If you don’t, Israel will hunt you down. Ladies and gentlemen, if Hamas agrees to our demands, the war could end right now. Gaza would be demilitarized, Israel would retain overriding security control, and a peaceful civilian authority would be established by Gazans and others committed to peace with Israel. And of course, you understand that the war in Gaza has affected every Israeli. But I’m sure there are people in New York, or in London, or in Melbourne, and elsewhere, who are probably thinking, ‘What does all of this have to do with me?’ And the answer is: everything. Because our enemies are your enemies. So let’s do something else, a first at the U.N. Let’s do a pop quiz. And raise your hand if you know the answer. Here’s the first question: Who shouts death to America? Is it A) Iran, B) Hamas, C) Hezbollah, D) the Houthis, or E) all of the above? All of the above. Correct! All of the above. Second question: Who has murdered Americans and Europeans in cold blood? Is it A. Al Qaeda, B. Hamas, C. Hezbollah, D. Iran, or E. All of the above? Crowd: All of the above. Correct again. So here’s the point I wanted to make: Our enemies hate all of us with equal venom. They want to drag the modern world back to the past, to a dark age of violence, fanaticism, and terror. I think many of you are already feeling, in your own societies, the radical Islamist surge. You know, I’m sure you do, you know deep down that Israel, Israel is fighting your fight. So I want to tell you a secret: Behind closed doors, many of the leaders who publicly condemn us, privately thank us.  They tell me how much they value Israel’s superb intelligence services that have prevented, time and again, terrorist attacks in their capitals, time and again, saving countless lives. General George Keegan, former head of U. S. Air Force Intelligence, once said “If the United States had to gather on its own the intelligence that Israel gives us, we would have to establish five CIAs.”  Five CIAs.  This past June, when Israel struck Iran’s nuclear facilities, German Chancellor Merz admitted the truth. He said, “Israel is doing the dirty work for all of us.”     President Trump understands better than any other leader that Israel and America face a common threat. He showed the world that when Iran and its proxies murder Americans, take Americans hostage, shout death to America, burn American flags, and try to assassinate the President of the United States — try to assassinate the President of the United States not once but twice —  He showed them there is a price to pay for all that. But regrettably, many leaders who are represented in this hall, they send a very different message. Sure, in the days immediately following October 7, many of them supported Israel. But that support quickly evaporated when Israel did what any self-respecting nation would do in the wake of such a savage attack: we fought back. Now just imagine, just sit back for a second and imagine: an attack against America proportionate to the attack against Israel on October 7. Imagine a regime, a terror regime, dispatching thousands of terrorists to invade the United States. They massacre 40,000 Americans, they take 10,000 Americans hostage. What do you think America would do? You think America would leave that regime standing? You don’t think that. No way. Not a chance. The United States would wipe out that terror regime and ensure that such savagery would never threaten America again. This is precisely what Israel is doing in Gaza. We’re wiping out the terror regime of Hamas and ensuring that this savagery will never threaten Israel again. That’s what we are doing. That’s what any self-respecting government would do.  Yet— and it’s a yet that I’m sorry to say here—yet over time many world leaders buckled. They buckled under the pressure of a biased media, radical Islamist constituencies, and anti-Semitic mobs. There’s a familiar saying: When the going gets tough, the tough get going. Well, for many countries here when the going got tough, you caved. And here’s the shameful result of that collapse: For much of the past two years, Israel has had to fight a seven-front war against barbarism, with many of your nations opposing us. Astoundingly, as we fight the terrorists who murdered many of your citizens, you are fighting us. You condemn us, you embargo us, and you wage political and legal warfare, it’s called lawfare, against us. I say to the representatives of those nations: this is not an indictment of Israel; It’s an indictment of you.  It’s an indictment of weak-kneed leaders who appease evil rather than support a nation whose brave soldiers guard you from the barbarians at the gates. They’re already penetrating your gates. When will you learn? You can’t appease your way out of jihad, and you won’t escape the Islamist storm by sacrificing Israel. To overcome that storm, you have to stand with Israel. But that’s not what you’re doing. As the prophets of Israel foretold in the Bible, you’ve turned good into evil and evil into good. Now I want to drill down on this. Take the false charge of genocide: Israel is accused of deliberately targeting civilians. Ladies and gentlemen, the opposite is true. The Head of Urban Warfare Studies, Colonel John Spencer, he’s perhaps the world’s greatest expert on urban warfare, and he says Israel is applying more measures to minimize civilian casualties than any military in history. And because we’re doing that, the ratio of noncombatant to combatant casualties is less than two to one in Gaza. That’s an astoundingly low ratio, lower than NATO’s wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, especially when you consider that Gaza is one of the most densely populated urban areas on Earth. It has hundreds of miles of terror tunnels underground, and it has countless terror towers above ground, and thousands of terrorists embedded in the tunnels and in these towers in civilian areas. If you want to see what measures Israel takes to avoid civilian casualties in this war, just look at what we’re doing now in Gaza City, the last Hamas stronghold, one of the two last strongholds. For three weeks, Israel dropped millions of leaflets, sent millions of text messages, and made countless phone calls urging civilians to leave Gaza City before our military moves in.  At the same time, Hamas implants itself in mosques, schools, hospitals, apartment buildings, and tries to force those civilians not to leave, to stay in harm’s way. And it often threatens them at gunpoint if they try to do so. For Israel, every civilian casualty is a tragedy. For Hamas, it’s a strategy. Hamas uses civilians as human shields and as props in its sick propaganda war against Israel – a propaganda war that the Western media buys hook, line, and sinker. Now, despite Hamas’ threats, close to 700,000 Gazans – almost three-quarters of a million – have already heeded our calls and moved to safe zones. Now I want to ask you a simple question: a simple logical question. Would a country committing genocide plead with the civilian population it is supposedly targeting to get out of harm’s way, would we tell them get out if we wanted to commit genocide? We’re trying to get them out, and Hamas is trying to keep them in. And this charge is so baseless. The comparison to genocide: wholesale slaughter of populations. Did the Nazis ask the Jews to leave, kindly leave, go out? Did others – you want me to name all the genocidal leaders of history? Just go one by one. Did anyone do this? Did they say, “Get out so we can come in?” Of course not. So the truth has been turned on its head. Hamas, a genocidal terrorist organization whose charter calls for the murder of all Jews on the planet, this genocidal organization is given a pass. It’s barely mentioned, while Israel which does everything it can to get civilians out of harm’s way, Israel is put in the dock. What a joke. You want to hear another one? Israel is accused of deliberately starving the people of Gaza, when Israel is deliberately feeding the people of Gaza. Since the beginning of the war Israel has let into Gaza more than two million tons of food and aid. That’s one ton of aid for every man, woman, and child in Gaza. Nearly 3,000 calories per person per day. Some starvation policy. If there are Gazans who don’t have enough food, it’s because Hamas is stealing it. Hamas steals it, hoards it, and sells it at exorbitant prices to fight its war machine. Last month, even the U.N. — not exactly a supporter of Israel— you’re supposed to laugh, by the way — last month, even the U.N. admitted that Hamas and other armed groups looted 85% of the trucks. That’s why you have deprivation. Those who peddled the blood libels of genocide and starvation against Israel are no better than those who peddled blood libels against the Jews in the Middle Ages when they falsely accused us of poisoning wells, spreading plague, and using the blood of children to bake Passover matzahs. Antisemitism dies hard. In fact, it doesn’t die at all. It just keeps coming back with its libelous lies, refurbished, regurgitated over and over again. And I want to tell you something else: these anti-Semitic lies, they have consequences. In recent months, Jews have been assaulted in Canada, Australia, Britain, France, the Netherlands, and elsewhere. Here in America, an elderly Holocaust survivor was burned to death in Colorado. And a beautiful young couple from the Israeli embassy in Washington was brutally gunned down right in front of the Holocaust museum there. Thankfully President Trump’s administration is forcefully fighting the scourge of antisemitism. And every government here should follow its lead. But instead, many do the opposite. They actually reward, reward the worst anti-Semites on earth. This week, the leaders of France, Britain, Australia, Canada, and other countries unconditionally recognized a Palestinian state. They did so after the horrors committed by Hamas on October 7, horrors praised on that day by nearly 90% of the Palestinian population. Let me say that again: Nearly 90% of Palestinians supported the attack on October 7. It’s not supported only, they celebrated. They danced on the rooftops. They threw candies. That’s both in Gaza and in Judea/Samaria, the West Bank, as you call it. And it’s just the way they celebrated another horror: 9/11. They danced on the rooftops. They cheered; they threw candy. You know what message the leaders who recognized a Palestinian state this week sent to the Palestinians? It’s a very clear message: murdering Jews pays off. Well, I have a message for these leaders: when the most savage terrorists on earth are effusively praising your decision, you didn’t do something right; you did something wrong, horribly wrong. Your disgraceful decision will encourage terrorism against Jews and against innocent people everywhere. It will be a mark of shame on all of you. “But, but, wait a minute, Mr. Prime Minister,” they tell me. “Wait a minute. We believe in a two-state solution where the Jewish state of Israel will live side by side in peace with the Palestinian state.” There’s only one problem with that. The Palestinians, they don’t believe in this solution. They never have. They don’t want a state next to Israel. They want a Palestinian state instead of Israel. And that’s why every time they were offered a Palestinian state but were required to end the conflict with Israel and recognize a Jewish state, every time over the decades they turned it down. And that is why every time they were given territory, they used it to attack us. In fact, they effectively had a Palestinian state in Gaza. So what did they do with that state? Peace? Coexistence? No. They attacked us time and time again, totally unprovoked. They fired rockets into our cities; they murdered our children, they turned Gaza into a terror base from which they committed the October 7 massacre. So here’s the uncomfortable truth: the persistent Palestinian rejection of a Jewish state in any boundary is what has driven this conflict for over a century. It is still driving it.  It’s not the absence of a Palestinian state. It’s the presence and existence of a Jewish state, and I find it amazing, amazing that the foreign chancelleries and the ministries and all those who pontificate about this, and the leaders, how can they not see this basic truth when it is repeated again and again and again ad nauseam? And I want to say something else: this rejection of a Jewish state not only applies to it; it also applies to the so-called “moderate Palestinian Authority.” You should know that the Palestinian Authority pays terrorists to slay Jews. The more Jews the terrorists slay, the more the Palestinian Authority pays. The Palestinian Authority names its government buildings its public squares, its schools, after the mass murderers of Jews, which they glorify as martyrs. They pay and glorify not just the killers of Jews, but also killers of Christians, Christians like Taylor Force, an American veteran who was brutally murdered in Israel by Palestinian terrorists. “But, but, but,” again, “but,” that I hear from the Western leaders, “They tell me, the PA promised us it will reform. And I know this time, Prime Minister, it will be different.” Yeah, right. We’ve heard these promises for decades. They always promise. They never deliver, because, you see, the Palestinian Authority is corrupt to the core. They haven’t held elections in 20 years. They use the same textbooks as Hamas; exactly the same textbooks. They teach their children to hate Jews and destroy the Jewish state. And Christians don’t fare much better. When Bethlehem, the birthplace of Jesus, was under Israeli control, 80% of its residents were Christians. But since the PA took control, that number has dwindled to under 20%. These are the people you want to give a state to? What you’re doing is giving the ultimate reward to intolerant fanatics who perpetrated and supported the October 7 massacre. Giving the Palestinians a state one mile from Jerusalem after October 7 is like giving Al Qaeda a state one mile from New York City after September 11. This is sheer madness. It’s insane. And we won’t do it.  So here’s another message to those Western leaders: Israel will not allow you to shove a terror state down our throats. We will not commit national suicide because you don’t have the guts to face down a hostile media and anti-Semitic mobs demanding Israel’s blood. And I want you to grasp something else, which is also distorted in the media. I say this not only in my name or the name of my government, but on behalf of all the people of Israel: Last year, there was a vote in the Knesset, our parliament, whether or not to oppose the imposition of a Palestinian state. You want to guess what the results were? Out of 120 members of our parliament, 99 voted against and only nine supported. That’s over 90 percent. It’s not a fringe group; it’s not the Prime Minister who himself is extreme, or he’s held hostage by extreme parties to his Right. It’s over 90 percent of Israelis. My opposition to a Palestinian state is not simply my policies or my government’s policy; it’s the policy of the state and people of the state of Israel. Western leaders may have buckled under the pressure. And I guarantee you one thing: Israel won’t. (applause) Thank you. I know you won’t too; that’s good. Israel’s victories over the Iranian terror axis have opened up possibilities for peace that were unthinkable two years ago. Take Syria. For decades, the very idea of peace between Israel and Syria seemed unimaginable. Well, no more. Today, we have begun serious negotiations with the new Syrian government. I believe an agreement can be reached that respects Syria’s sovereignty and protects both Israeli security and the security of the minorities in the region, including the Druze minority. From the founding of Israel, Jews and Druze have been brothers in arms. We have fought together. We’ve bled together. We’ve built our lives together. When I was a young Commander in Israel’s special forces, my own life was saved by the invaluable advice given to me by a great friend, Salim Shoufi, a heroic Druze IDF veteran. That’s why I couldn’t sit idly by, nor could Israel sit idly by while the Druze were being slaughtered by jihadists. And I instructed our forces to stop the massacre, which they promptly did. Peace between Israel and Lebanon is possible as well. I call on the Lebanese government to also begin direct negotiations. I commend it for its declared aim to disarm Hezbollah. But we need more than words. If Lebanon takes genuine and sustained action to disarm Hezbollah, I’m sure we can achieve a sustainable peace. Of course, until that happens, we will take whatever action we need to defend ourselves and to maintain the conditions of the ceasefire, which was established in Lebanon.  Our goal is not merely to monitor Hezbollah’s actions, but to prevent them from violating the ceasefire and attacking us at any time. But I’m sure that if the Lebanese government persists in its goal of disarming Hezbollah, peace will come very speedily and very readily. Victory over Hezbollah has made peace possible with our two Arab neighbors in the North. Victory over Hamas will make peace possible with nations throughout the Arab and Muslim world. Our victory would lead to a dramatic extension and expansion of the historic Abraham Accords, which President Trump brokered between Arab leaders and myself five years ago. And I took note, as I’m sure you did too, of the encouraging words spoken here by the President of Indonesia. This is the country with the largest Muslim population of all nations.  And it’s also a sign of what could come. Forward-looking Arabs and Muslim leaders know that cooperating with Israel will provide them with groundbreaking Israeli technologies, including in medicine and science, in agriculture and water, in defense and AI, and so many other fields. I believe that in the coming years, the Middle East will look dramatically different. Many of those who wage war on Israel today will be gone tomorrow. Brave peacemakers will take their place. And nowhere, nowhere will this be more true than in Iran. The long-suffering Iranian people will regain their freedom. They will make Iran great again. And our two ancient peoples, our two ancient peoples, the people of Israel and the people of Iran will restore a friendship that will benefit the entire world. Ladies and gentlemen, the horrors that happened on one dark day, October 7, those horrors happened countless times during the centuries of my people’s exiles among the nations. Jewish blood was cheap. Jews were killed with impunity. We had to beg others to defend us. The rise of Israel did not mean that the attempts to destroy us would end. It meant that we could fight back against those attempts. And that is exactly what Israel has done since October 7. Our sons and daughters fought like lions. Our brave soldiers donned their uniforms and rushed into battle. They were armed with the dreams of the hundred generations of Jews who came before them: the dream of living as a free people in the land of Israel, our beloved homeland, for more than 3,000 years. The dreams of living in our own independent state, the dream of having an army to defend ourselves, and the dream of being a light unto the nations— a beacon of progress, ingenuity, innovation for the benefit of all humanity. On October 7, the enemies of Israel tried to extinguish that light. Two years later, the resolve of Israel and the strength of Israel burn brighter than ever. With God’s help, that strength and that resolve will lead us to a speedy victory and to a brilliant future of prosperity and peace. Thank you very much.

The following is an edited transcript of an interview between Isabel Brown and the director of the National Institutes of Health, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya. Catch the full interview on “The Isabel Brown Show” on DailyWire+. * * * Isabel Brown: Doctor Bhattacharya, we are so excited to have you on “The Isabel Brown Show.” You’ve been one of our top-requested guests, especially from young parents. There is so much confusion about science, about what science means in the wake of the COVID pandemic, and the political weaponization of COVID. So, for those who aren’t scientists like me and don’t read a bunch of peer-reviewed studies all the time, or keep up with PubMed, can you explain where we are right now and what the big changes have been here at the NIH in the last few months? Dr. Jay Bhattacharya: Sure. So first of all, the NIH is an amazing institution. Frankly, it’s the best part of government. I’m biased, but the reason I think that is because it’s responsible for so many amazing discoveries over the last century, like almost all of the things we know about medicine. A lot of those advances came out of this place where we’re sitting. And so, with that kind of history behind it and the actual mission — research that improves the health and longevity of the American people — like, who can be against that? But the problem was that, during the pandemic, it came to be associated essentially with all of the problems we saw with the lockdowns, the school closures, you know, all of that. But even before that, the possibility that the NIH contributed to the work that may have caused the pandemic, not intentionally, but by doing that dangerous research (for reasons we can probably get into in just a bit). But then, with the vaccine mandates, a lot of the public lost trust in the NIH. And that’s just a fact. We just have to deal with that fact. And where we are now is this clash between what the NIH ought to be — which is this shining institution that makes everyone healthy and is devoted to science, and then the raw facts of what happened with the pandemic, where science really just didn’t do very well. Brown: That’s so well-articulated, and honestly, it’s insane that we can freely have this conversation now, knowing how much backlash and censorship and confusion there has been around science. Literally. Yesterday, Google announced through YouTube that they did, in fact, cave to a lot of pressure from the last administration about censoring any sort of open dialogue related to how we treat Covid-19, how we responded to it from a public health perspective. And now, four years, five years later, they’re going to end up restoring a lot of those accounts. Dr. Bhattacharya: In March 2021, I was in a policy roundtable organized by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. So you remember, the mask mandates, the craziness around masking toddlers, two-year-olds? The United States was always the outlier. Everywhere else in the world, no one was saying, “mask toddlers.” The governor then asked me in March of 2021, “Should we mask toddlers? What’s the scientific evidence?” And I had looked this up, because I knew he was going to ask me this question. There’s none. There’s literally nothing. It was based on nothing. And so I said to the governor, “There’s no good scientific evidence that we should mask toddlers.” And YouTube censored that video. So, it was shocking to me how the government used its muscle during the pandemic to silence scientific discussion. The Biden administration was absolutely terrible on free speech, absolutely terrible. And, you know, science can’t function without free speech — it’s fundamental to how science works, you should be able to disagree with me. That’s good in science. Brown: Well, that’s what the scientific method is all about, right? We all learned that in elementary school, in our education system in America. But I will never forget being a graduate student here at Georgetown, right at the beginning of 2020, and seeing the COVID pandemic emerge — learning from some of the top people here at the NIH and the FDA and the WHO in their public health response — and being told in my classroom from so many of these educated scientists, “There’s something really wrong here. We’ve never responded to a disease this way, ever. This social distancing concept, the lockdown concept, the masking concept.” It was insane. I mean, priests were shooting Super Soaker water guns to baptize your child in church because that was the science! And you weren’t allowed to question anything. Dr. Bhattacharya: That’s when the church was allowed to be open.  Brown: Exactly. Eventually, years and years down the line. But it was so confusing to me, as someone who had been trained as a scientist, to ask all of the big questions about how something works, which is never to arrive at the conclusion before you see all of the evidence. But we had inverted that entire process and silenced and censored people like yourself in the process. So that obviously spurred some action in you, and wanting to get more involved. Walk us through what that looked like for you.  Dr. Bhattacharya: Well, it’s surreal to be sitting as the director of NIH. The former director kind of went after me pretty viciously — Francis Collins, not the immediate former director. I don’t know how else to explain it other than there’s something about the way God uses people, it’s just completely unexpected. But, to me, it’s a huge obligation that I can restore the NIH to what it should be. In order to do that, we have to change the things that led to the problems of the pandemic. And then, double down on the things that I know we can do well, right? The fundamental research that advances knowledge and translates into better health for people. So that’s what we have to do to restore trust.  You asked me earlier about a few things that we’ve done. So, the president signed an executive order pausing all dangerous gain-of-function research (GOF), the kind of research that likely led to the pandemic. The whole idea of the dangerous gain-of-function research was sold as a way of preventing all pandemics. We just go out into the wild places, get a virus or whatever, bring it to the lab, manipulate it so it’s more dangerous to humans. The idea was, how many evolutionary steps do you need before you can make the virus more transmissible? And if it’s very few, well, that virus is a high risk. If it’s a lot, you bring the virus in, and it takes a lot to do it — then that virus is low risk. And then you prepare vaccines in advance for the viruses that are high risk. The problem with that idea is that you make vaccines in advance that have never been tested on humans. And then when the virus makes the leap, you’re not ready, because those vaccines have never been tested on humans. You don’t know if they’re going to work. And then the other thing is that evolution happens. And so the virus that actually makes a leap may look very different than the one that you studied in the lab, and then, of course, there’s the possibility of lab leaks. So I was really delighted when the president signed the executive order, and said no more dangerous gain of function. And we’ve been working on a regulatory framework with the White House to make sure that this never happens again. Isabel Brown: That’s fantastic. Dr. Bhattacharya: It’s a huge advance. The president signed an executive order, I think on day one, restoring free speech. And so, this is going to sound crazy, because it was crazy to me. It turned out that, at the NIH, there are a huge number of internal scientists who needed to get permission from above before they could send their scientific papers out for publication. I started looking over, and I’ve been a Stanford professor for a long time, and I never had to get permission until the pandemic, but that’s another story. Academic freedom means scientists are going to be able to publish things that I disagree with as a director. That’s a good thing. And so, I put in place a policy that says, if you’re a scientist here at the NIH and you have a scientific result you believe in, you can send it out for publication. You don’t need to get my permission or permission from any of your supervisors. There’s a whole host of things, but I think that’s the beginning of how you restore trust. Put regulation of things that we should not be doing like dangerous gain-of-function. We shouldn’t be taking existential risks on behalf of the American people or the world population without extensive regulation. And then, let’s restore free speech.  Brown: I’m so glad you’re talking about this bioethical conversation, because this is something we cover a lot on our show. My audience knows I’m a scientist by education, but these days I talk more about science rather than participate in it. But something that’s been really puzzling to me over the past few years is the idea that we’ve just gotten so out of control with research, with clinical implementation of different scientific methods, that we don’t even stop to ask the question, just because we can, which is, “Should we?” Has there been any research here at the NIH that has been alarming to you since coming in as the director, other than gain-of-function research, that made you ask, “Why are we doing this? There could be a lot more potential negative side effects than positive benefits?” Dr. Bhattacharya: I will give you one that’s become a political hot potato. But I think I still am puzzled. How did this happen? The NIH is excellent at science, right? It’s excellent at doing fundamental biology. It’s excellent at doing clinical research and should be better at taking that clinical research and figuring out ways to get to the American people better. Those are the things we’ve been good at for a long time. Essentially, the mission of the NIH is to conduct research that advances the health and longevity of the American people. It turns out, the NIH, as a part of its portfolio, included DEI. So there was an additional mission added on that was never articulated. The NIH is supposed to solve the social justice problems that we’re not really equipped to solve. We’re scientists. We don’t do that. We can’t. There’s nothing that we can do that will establish utopia on Earth. We discover new things that make people healthier, maybe help them live longer. To establish social justice? It perverted the way we think about science and made it more difficult. In social justice, people have very, very strong feelings. You can’t test it empirically. Right? Suppose I believe that the world is systemically racist. And it has been for its history. Okay. Well, how do you empirically test that idea? And then you say you think systemic racism is the reason why certain groups are very unhealthy. How do you empirically test that? You can’t run the world a second time. You can’t establish a control group. It’s not something in our capacity to do, so we’ve removed a lot of that from our portfolio. It’s been painful when you tell scientists to do something, they’ll try to do something. But that’s something I think hasn’t actually translated over to better health for minorities. If you go back to the last decade and a half, there’s been no real increase in life expectancy for minorities. It hasn’t translated over to better health for most of the population. It’s just politically divisive with no real benefit to show for it. And so I think what the NIH ought to be is an institution devoted to its mission. Right? Advanced research that advances health, and leaves the politics aside. Just remove it. And that’s what we’ve been working on is trying to get a portfolio of research projects that really are science, that really have the potential to advance the health of every American minority and non-minority. It doesn’t matter who you are. We want the research to really help you. Using science as a cover to fight crazy social justice political fights just harms the NIH.  Brown: I am not surprised to hear you say that. Although I think the average American might be surprised to hear you say we should leave the politics out of science, especially this week. I’m seeing a lot of people in the media say that President Trump, Secretary Kennedy, you, and other people here involved in the science aspect of the administration are using science to push a political agenda, particularly at this intersection of Tylenol and autism. There’s been a lot that’s happened in the last 48 hours or so, but let’s remove the politics for a second and back up. And can you explain from a scientific perspective where this is really coming from?  Dr. Bhattacharya: Sure. So, it turns out that if you go back ten years, there were early reports that women who take Tylenol during pregnancy, especially late in pregnancy, their children, after birth, are more likely to have some neurodevelopmental conditions like ADHD and autism. Now, there’s a fight in the scientific literature, there always is, between how much of that effect is right. Some people think it’s a tiny effect, on the positive side (hard to detect). Other people think it’s larger. So, there was that fight going on. Then, in 2016, 2017, there were news reports about this literature. There’s been a lot of interest in it scientifically, but it never got the sort of attention from the public after 2016, 2017. Recently, there was a study published by some researchers at Harvard University and at Mount Sinai University, their medical school in New York. And the researchers concluded, along with the dean of public health at Harvard, that this literature supported a cautious stance toward using Tylenol when you’re pregnant. I can understand the reason for the cautious stance because, if you have a high fever and you’re pregnant, that can hurt your baby. And you don’t want to leave that alone. Tylenol may be the only way to alleviate that. Do that, in that case. On the other hand, there are situations where people take Tylenol, and maybe they don’t have to. They could have other ways of managing the problems that they are dealing with. And so, what the researchers concluded when they did this review of the literature is that prudent medicine says take the lowest possible dose for the shortest amount of time. Think carefully before you use it, because there might be this side effect. There’s a big fight over whether it actually causes autism or it’s just associated with it. In my view, that scientific fight I don’t think has yet been resolved, but I think I have an obligation to tell people when there is this finding that can help guide people’s decisions. You should know when you’re pregnant that there is this fight going on in the scientific literature. Isabel Brown: That sounds so reasonable. That’s so shocking to me that this is such a reasonable conversation. Dr. Bhattacharya: So, I have a theory. When you go back to the pandemic — you remember June 2020? You probably weren’t paying attention because you didn’t have kids yet, but I was paying careful attention because my kids were in school then. In June 2020, a whole bunch of scientists looked at what had happened in Sweden with the opening of schools. The Swedes never closed their schools for kids under 16. The evidence was that the teachers were at the same risk as other workers in the economy, not higher risk, and that the kids got to have school, had to go to school, they got to have a normal life. And you can see it in the numbers now, the Swedish kids have no increase in depression or anxiety, there’s no learning loss. The Swedes did not hurt their kids. That evidence was in by June 2020. And so, people were saying, “Let’s open schools,” including the American Academy of Pediatrics. Then, President Trump has a press conference where he says, “We should open schools.” And then the AAP, the American Academy of Pediatrics, changes its mind shortly after the president’s speech, based on no scientific evidence, because the scientific evidence already by June of 2020 was clear — that closing schools in the spring of 2020 was a mistake. As best I can tell, the only thing that changed was the president said, “we should open schools” and somehow whatever the president says is, for some people, automatically wrong. He was more scientifically right than the AAP was. I can’t speak like the president, I’m a geeky scientist so I’m never going to be like him. But, when he goes and tells people — I was standing there right next to him in that [Tylenol] press conference — and he says, “Don’t take it. Don’t take it unless you need to.” Isn’t that exactly what I said? JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images Brown: Yes. Just a little bit louder, perhaps with his style of speaking. And that’s the part that’s just been baffling me these last 48 hours. Because what’s really unfortunate is that this isn’t just silly clickbait headlines or ridiculous posts on social media. This is actually impacting people’s health. Now, this has turned into a TikTok viral challenge of these pregnant women who are basically downing bottles of Tylenol to try to prove Trump wrong that it won’t cause autism. This morning, I came across several stories of women who have overdosed on acetaminophen and were on ventilators in the hospital. Their babies could die because of this. That’s why I think this restoration of public trust in science is so important, because this really has nothing to do with President Trump or whoever is sitting in the Oval Office. This is just belief in objective medicine and science, right? Dr. Bhattacharya: No, exactly. I saw some of those reports. Tylenol is an over-the-counter drug, but it’s probably the most dangerous over-the-counter drug. It’s very easy to overdose and make your liver basically go kaput. So you have to be careful with it regardless. I think there are cumulative overdoses also. If you take too much over a relatively short period of time, you can build up toxicity in your liver and actually kill your liver. And so doctors will say when taking Tylenol, to be careful with it. The president is just saying be careful during pregnancy. It’s heartbreaking to watch people take such risks with their health simply for narrow political points. I mean, in medicine, we’re supposed to do no harm. And I’ve seen doctors, pregnant doctors on TikTok, taking it when they don’t need it. It just blows my mind. Basically, it’s a poisoning of medicine with politics in a way that should never happen. Brown: Well, I think you hit the nail on the head that just because it happened to come out while this administration is in political power, there’s obviously going to be a natural response to that, which is unfortunate, but is symptomatic of the society that we live in today. And I’m starting to see a little bit of that associated with many of the other initiatives championed by Secretary Kennedy and the Department of Agriculture. I know we just brought on Dr. Ben Carson as a nutrition advisor, which is fantastic, and I’m very excited to see that. What potential backlash are you guys anticipating when it comes to some of these new initiatives? And what are some of the next initiatives that are going to come out of the NIH? Dr. Bhattacharya: Well, I hope there are no backlashes, because I think they make sense. So here’s one big initiative that I’ve been working on. It turns out that even when a lot of scientific papers are published and peer-reviewed in top journals, many independent scientists don’t reach the conclusions when looking at the same question. And we’ve known this for decades. When I was a med student 5 million years ago, because, you know, I’m old, my favorite professor would tell me, “Look, Jay, half of what you’re learning is not true.” And as a young med student, I was like, “Wait, what? What do you mean, what’s, which half is not true?” And he said, “Look, science is difficult. If you have some knowledge about something, it’s very often the case that when other people look at the same thing, they’re going to find a different answer.” And that’s absolutely true. For example, when I was a med student, ulcers were not caused by bacteria. Scientists now know they’re caused by bacteria. But when I was a med student in the ancient days, the treatment for ulcers was to stop drinking coffee. And sometimes they do surgery to cut off your vagus nerve. The point is that often what I learned in school turned out not to be true. That was in part because of new discoveries. But it’s also the case that a lot of scientific papers that are published are just not true. That’s because science is hard. If I think something is true, but it’s a negative result, I can’t get it published. It’s very hard. But I can convince myself I’m right. I can even be very persuasive in the scientific literature. That I’m right and then get it published. But if you were to do another look at it yourself, independent of me, maybe you won’t find the same thing. That’s really common in science. So it’s called a replication crisis. I think the NIH should solve that. What also happens is that maybe you have some authority. I publish in a top journal. Therefore, I’m right. Yep. I’m an NIH director or a fancy Stanford professor or something. Therefore, I’m right. But that’s not what the basis of truth is in science. The basis of truth is that other people looking at the same thing find the same answer or very similar answers, looking at it from a different point of view. There’s this idea of consilience — everyone looking at it, looking at it together, looking at in different ways, to find the same answer. That’s how we know we’re right. Brown: Well, that’s how something is supposed to be peer-reviewed, right? Dr. Bhattacharya: Ultimately, yes. Peer review by itself, by the way, is actually a narrow process. I peer-reviewed thousands of papers — I’ve lost count of how many because I get some crazy number of papers — and no one ever gives me the data that they used, I just read the paper and see if it makes logical sense. But I don’t actually replicate what they did. Peer review is necessary, but it’s not sufficient to establish truth. And so, with the NIH, we can solve that problem. That’s one thing I’m working on. Let’s make people who do replication, let them have the honored place in science they deserve. Right now, you can’t make a career out of it, but we can fix that. Let’s have a place to publish those results, those negative results, those replication studies, and link them back. So if you do a search for a paper, it’s published in the New England Journal of Medicine, therefore, it must be true. No, there’ll be a replication button. You click the replication button, and all the relevant replication research to that paper comes up summarized. So you can click each one and see, do other people looking at the same thing find the same answer? Let’s make that the basis of truth in science. * * * Catch the full interview on “The Isabel Brown Show” on DailyWire+.

With the baby boomers dying off, many people ask me, “What is Gen Z like, and what does it mean for the future?” But with the baby boomers dying off, I don’t have time to answer — and anyway, what’s it to me? However, there is a new poll out on how these Gen Z whippersnappers see things, and the results are very encouraging in the sense they’ll allow me to die happy in the knowledge that the rest of you are screwed. The poll of around 3,000 respondents between the ages of 18 and 29 was specially designed to elicit information from young people by posing its questions in the form of emojis and inarticulate whining noises and then pretending to take the answers seriously. The results had a margin of error of 79%, because the young people had no clue what the hell they were talking about and then changed their minds when they found out what life was really like. The young people were asked such questions as: What do you value most? Is America headed in the right direction? What the hell do you know, you nose-ringed freak? And why don’t you get a job and find your own place to live, you’re 20-years old already, for crying out loud? The respondents were then divided by gender using a buzz saw and a surgical needle threaded with fishing line. Then the genders were separated politically by riot police with tear gas and rubber bullets. Finally, the survivors sat around smoking weed until the women fell asleep and the men, of course, had sex with them. The results of the poll show that among young men, the number one thing they valued most was having children. The number four thing they valued most was getting married. Numbers two and three were avoiding paying child support and using pig’s blood during a paternity test before changing their names and moving out of state. Among women, the number one thing they valued most was their jobs, the number two thing they valued was emotional stability and the number three thing they valued were anti-depressants. These women also valued making TikTok videos expressing completely nonsensical opinions in a smug voice while smiling like Anthony Perkins in the last frame of “Psycho,” and secretly wishing some guy would marry them and tell them what to do because they’re obviously out of their minds. The poll also revealed ingrained differences between young men and women when it came to political issues. For instance, 56% of young men feel that Donald Trump is doing an excellent job as president, while 82% of young women also have political opinions but nobody bothered to write them down because, let’s face it, who cares? The biggest political divide between the genders was on immigration. Young women felt that it was a crying shame to deport an upstanding pillar of the community just because he had come here illegally, and had drunkenly crashed his car into an elementary school, then escaped before the police discovered the child tied up in his trunk. Young men didn’t answer the question because they were too busy watching cool videos of ICE agents slamming fat Mexicans into the sides of their jalopies while screaming the f-word. One surprising result in the poll is that young people increasingly favor socialism. They listed their primary reasons as — one — they’d have a lot of time to play “Candy Crush” while they were standing in line to get a loaf of bread. Two, they’ve seen the mini-series “Chernobyl” and it looked really cool when people’s flesh started to melt like in a science fiction movie only real. And three, under socialism, there would be no corporations and everything would be free, so you could just pick up a new iPhone any time you wanted … wherever it is that iPhones come from. All in all, the results of the poll demonstrated that Generation Z is called Generation Z for a good reason: namely, nothing comes after Z. * * * This excerpt is taken from the opening satirical monologue of “The Andrew Klavan Show.” Andrew Klavan is the host of “The Andrew Klavan Show” at The Daily Wire. Klavan is the bestselling author of numerous books, including the Cameron Winter Mystery series. The fifth installment, After That, The Dark, is now available for Pre-Order. Follow him on X: @andrewklavan The views expressed in this satirical piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.