'I over indulged'

The child suffered a seizure during the alleged attack

'Not making things up'

'It will end its preemption of Jimmy Kimmel Live!'

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Starting October 12, Americans flying to Europe will encounter a very different system at passport control. Nearly 30 countries in the Schengen Area are switching to the EU’s new Entry-Exit System (EES), a digital border program designed to replace the traditional stamping of passports with electronic records and biometric checks. The Schengen zone includes most of the EU, such as France, Germany, and Italy, as well as non-EU members Switzerland, Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway. For decades, travel within this zone has involved minimal border controls, but the introduction of the EES marks a move toward more structured monitoring of visitors from outside Europe. For US citizens, the immediate change is that border officers will no longer stamp passports. Instead, personal information such as names, passport numbers, and entry and exit dates will be stored in a centralized database. First-time arrivals after October 12 will also need to provide biometric details, including fingerprints and a facial image. On later trips, only those stored identifiers will need to be verified. The EU noted, “The passport control officers will only verify your fingerprints and photo, which will take less time.” Processing is expected to take longer at the beginning, but EU officials insist that over time the system will allow smoother movement through airports and land crossings. The stated purpose is twofold: to speed up checks and to ensure travelers respect the rule that allows only 90 days of stay within a rolling 180-day period. Travelers might also encounter self-service kiosks or mobile apps at certain border points, which could allow them to register some data in advance. As the EU explained, “This process can be quicker if you register some of your data in advance.” However, every traveler will still need to interact with a border officer, and in some cases, data may need to be collected again. While the EES is about logging entries and exits, it should not be confused with ETIAS, a separate travel authorization requirement set to launch in late 2026. ETIAS will require Americans to complete an online application and pay a fee before boarding a flight to Europe. The new biometric checks will be rolled out gradually across participating countries starting in October, with full implementation expected by April 10, 2026. For privacy-minded travelers, the shift raises concerns, since extensive personal and biometric information will now be retained by European authorities each time an American crosses the border. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post EU to Launch Biometric Entry-Exit System for US Travelers, Starting October 12 appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

Netanyahu to UN: 'You Can't Appease Your Way Out of Jihad'

Today's Deep Question: Why Do Apple, Google Still Platform ICEBlock?

Sinclair, one of the two major ABC affiliate owners that was still preempting Jimmy Kimmel Live!, announced on Friday that it is backing down. In a statement, Sinclair said, “Our objective throughout this process has been to ensure that programming remains accurate and engaging for the widest possible audience. We take seriously our responsibility as local broadcasters to provide programming that serves the interests of our communities, while also honoring our obligations to air national network programming.” It noted with disappointment, “In our ongoing and constructive discussions with ABC, Sinclair proposed measures to strengthen accountability, viewer feedback, and community dialogue, including a network-wide independent ombudsman. These proposals were suggested as collaborative efforts between the ABC affiliates and the ABC network. While ABC and Disney have not yet adopted these measures, and Sinclair respects their right to make those decisions under our network affiliate agreements, we believe such measures could strengthen trust and accountability.” Addressing accusations that there were ulterior motives at play, Sinclair insisted, “Our decision to preempt this program was independent of any government interaction or influence. Free speech provides broadcasters with the right to exercise judgment as to the content on their local stations. While we understand that not everyone will agree with our decisions about programming, it is simply inconsistent to champion free speech while demanding that broadcasters air specific content.” In their original statement, Sinclair said that it “calls upon Mr. Kimmel to issue a direct apology to the Kirk family. Furthermore, we ask Mr. Kimmel to make a meaningful personal donation to the Kirk Family and Turning Point USA.” On September 15, Kimmel declared, ““We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it.” That did not happen, so what explains Sinclair’s reversal? It probably came down to a realization that any prolonged fight with ABC and Disney would not have ended well for them. Because Jimmy Kimmel Live! was off the air in around 25 percent of the country, ABC would have eventually been faced with a drop in ad revenue that could have led them to bring incredible pressure on Sinclair by threatening to withhold other programing including Monday Night Football. With Sinclair’s backing down, the number of markets without Jimmy Kimmel Live! declined to the 28 owned by Nexstar.

On Thursday morning, CNN’s Wolf Blitzer attempted to get Dallas Mayor Eric Johnson (R) to denounce both the Trump administration’s stance on left-wing rhetoric and the Democratic Party. Blitzer pestered Johnson three times on the matter, while the Mayor did his best to stay out of the devious snare. The Situation Room host first tried to get Johnson to bash President Trump (while also denying the existence of a clear motive): BLITZER: Kash Patel, the FBI Director, released a picture of a bullet recovered from the scene inscribed with the words "ANTI-ICE." But investigators are still probing what the motive was for this attack. So why do you think President Trump already is blaming what he calls, “Radical Left Democrats?” Do you think he should stop doing that? JOHNSON: I can't speak for the President […] But increasing numbers of young people today in this country – and I think it's being stoked in a lot of ways by some of this rhetoric around law enforcement and ICE being the enemy, ICE being the Gestapo, ICE being a criminal organization of some sort. That's creating a real problem. And I think we have to really face this head on. And I think the President is sensitive to that. The Mayor was wise to not fall into Blitzer’s initial trap. Blitzer clearly wanted to take a cheap-shot at Trump by stirring up conflict between the local government and the federal government. A lack of synergy over such a hot-button topic would only make both parties look bad.     Blitzer then played a clip of Stephen Miller’s appearance on Hannity a month prior: BLITZER: He says the Democratic Party is a domestic extremist organization, not a political party. You were elected to your first term as a Democrat, but now you're a Republican. Is the Deputy White House Chief of Staff wrong to call your former party a domestic extremist organization? JOHNSON: Here's how I would describe the situation with the two parties. I think there's one party, the Republican Party, that has consistently – and, in fact, I can't think of a time when the Republican Party has not stood for law and order and has not supported law enforcement. And I think the Democrat Party, which I was a member of for a very long time and switched a couple of years ago basically over this issue. Johnson dodged the question and did not wish to play partisan games. Instead, he calmly and rationally highlighted the main disagreement he had with his former party. Blitzer wasn't satisfied with the answer, he seemed so offended that anyone would call the Democrats "extremists."  BLITZER: Let me just press you. Is the Democratic Party a domestic extremist organization as the Deputy White House Chief of Staff says? JOHNSON: I don't know if there's a defined – if those words have a definition, whatever he said. I will tell you this. It's a political party that does not support, to the extent that it should, law and order – and particularly our immigration laws – and has not been very supportive of the police. And I lived through it during the defund the police movement, and I left the party over it. Johnson should have called out Blitzer for trying to associate him with Miller. Weakness only serves the aggressor. Wolf hasn't seemed this offended since a Republican called CNN's Manu Raju a "liberal hack." That, he said, was "disgusting." After a third shove, Johnson relented and half-answered Blitzer’s question: BLITZER: But I still am not hearing you answer the question. Is the Democratic Party an extremist organization as Stephen Miller, the Deputy White House Chief of Staff, insists? JOHNSON: I think their views on law enforcement, to the extent that they are defining ICE as a criminal organization or the problem, is an extreme view. I think that's an extreme view, yes. If that answers your question, Wolf […] So, again, those aren't my words, so I don't want to adopt that exact language as my own, but I think extreme is an appropriate description of that position. Johnson obeyed TV’s three-question rule the safest way possible. He didn’t demonize the Democratic Party as an “extremist organization,” but he did stick to his belief that the left has vilified law enforcement. The Mayor should have said this outright. But, at the very least, didn’t fall for Blitzer’s dishonest game. This interview was a set-up. Blitzer was not really interested in getting Johnson’s perspective on the shooting, but rather wanted to create a moment he could later refer back to either as evidence of inter-Republican strife or Republicans hating on Democrats. The transcript is below. Click "expand" read: CNN’s The Situation Room September 25, 2025 11:15:58 a.m. Eastern (…) WOLF BLITZER: Joining us now is Eric Johnson, the Mayor of Dallas. Mayor, thanks of all for joining us. First of all, our condolences. This is all new information we're getting from the FBI director, Kash Patel, saying it shows a high degree of planning. First of all, what's your reaction? MAY. ERIC JOHNSON (R): Well, first of all, thanks for having me on, Wolf. It's really sad. I want to stay out of the way of the FBI's investigation and not comment too much on what they're discovering. But I will tell you that it's very troubling, I think, the trend that we're seeing of increasing political violence in this country. And yesterday's political violence hit close to home for us here in Dallas. And we're concerned. We're concerned about just the division that seems to be leading to some folks taking these very, very unfortunate and violent steps to try to bring about policy changes. It's just wrong and it's scary. It's very scary. BLITZER: It certainly is. How unsettling, Mayor, do you find this level of planning that apparently went into this? JOHNSON: Well, again, it's new information, and so we're still processing it. But it shows that people are paying attention to these violent acts and there's a certain amount of copycat-ism going on out there. This is not something to be trifled with. This is not something to be taken lightly. The vilification of ICE and law enforcement generally that's been going on – led primarily by folks on the left, in my humble opinion – has created a situation where things like this are going to continue to happen if we don't do something. We have to decry the vilification of law enforcement and the idea that violence can ever be a tool to bring about policy change. I just think we have to draw a very, very bright line and just say it's never okay to avail yourself of violence to try to bring about policy change. And so we’ve got some work to do, serious work to do in this country, because lives are at stake. BLITZER: Kash Patel, the FBI Director, released a picture of a bullet recovered from the scene inscribed with the words "ANTI-ICE." But investigators are still probing what the motive was for this attack. So why do you think President Trump already is blaming what he calls, “Radical Left Democrats?” Do you think he should stop doing that? JOHNSON: I can't speak for the President, but I think — I think this much is clear. There is a growing trend amongst – particularly, I think data is showing amongst younger folks in this country to availing themselves of violence as a means to bring about policy change. It's just something that I think should be off the table. And I think most folks, most – there was a time when we actually just didn't believe that this was something that should be ever on the table to try to make a policymaker change their mind about a decision. But increasing numbers of young people today in this country – and I think it's being stoked in a lot of ways by some of this rhetoric around law enforcement and ICE being the enemy, ICE being the Gestapo, ICE being a criminal organization of some sort. That's creating a real problem. And I think we have to really face this head on. And I think the President is sensitive to that. I think he's concerned about that. But I can't speak to how he's characterizing the evidence that's being released by the FBI right now. And I want to make sure I steer clear of that investigation as well. But I am deeply concerned about the growth of political violence in this country. And I think we have to deal with it. BLITZER: We all are deeply concerned. As you know, Mayor, the Deputy White House Chief of Staff, Stephen Miller, has long vilified Democrats, including the whole party, basically. Listen to what he said just a month ago. Listen to this. We’ll get your reaction. [Cuts to clip] STEPHEN MILLER [on Hannity, 08/25/25]: The Democrat Party does not fight for, care about, or represent American citizens. It is an entity devoted exclusively to the defense of hardened criminals, gangbangers, and illegal alien killers and terrorists. The Democrat Party is not a political party. It is a domestic extremist organization. [Cuts back to live] BLITZER: He says the Democratic Party is a domestic extremist organization, not a political party. You were elected to your first term as a Democrat, but now you're a Republican. Is the Deputy White House Chief of Staff wrong to call your former party a domestic extremist organization? JOHNSON: Here's how I would describe the situation with the two parties. I think there's one party, the Republican Party, that has consistently – and, in fact, I can't think of a time when the Republican Party has not stood for law and order and has not supported law enforcement. And I think the Democrat Party, which I was a member of for a very long time and switched a couple of years ago basically over this issue. The Democrat Party has decided that, in an effort to gain greater support from certain activist groups – in 2020, it was Black Lives Matter. Most recently, it's been some of the pro-immigration groups in the country – that they are going to try to paint law enforcement, our local police, as a threat to the safety of our residents and our citizens in this country, as much of a threat as actual violent criminals. And same with ICE. They have tried to now paint ICE as an organization that is as much of a threat to Americans as violent criminals. And that is not consistent with being a party of law and order and us being a nation of laws. And I left the party over it. I support the police. People in my city support the police. And I think ICE is enforcing the laws of this country. That's what they're doing – BLITZER: But Mayor, let me just press you. JOHNSON: - And I don't think that they should be vilified for it. BLITZER: Let me just press you. Is the Democratic Party a domestic extremist organization as the Deputy White House Chief of Staff says? JOHNSON: I don't know if there's a defined – if those words have a definition, whatever he said. I will tell you this. It's a political party that does not support, to the extent that it should, law and order – and particularly our immigration laws – and has not been very supportive of the police. And I lived through it during the defund the police movement, and I left the party over it. The Democrat Party, for sure, seems to feel more sympathy toward people who are perpetuating crimes than the victim of crimes. So I don't know about the language that Mr. Miller used, but I will tell you that's been my experience with the Democrat Party. That's why I left. BLITZER: But I still am not hearing you answer the question. Is the Democratic Party an extremist organization as Stephen Miller, the Deputy White House Chief of Staff, insists? JOHNSON: I think their views on law enforcement, to the extent that they are defining ICE as a criminal organization or the problem, is an extreme view. I think that's an extreme view, yes. If that answers your question, Wolf. I think that to characterize an agency of the federal government, that's enforcing the laws of the United States and helping to keep our country's border secure, is being defined as a criminal organization or the enemy of the people that needs to be resisted, and sanctioning in many ways the kinds of things that we were seeing happening in the country, including yesterday, then I think that's an extreme view. So, again, those aren't my words, so I don't want to adopt that exact language as my own, but I think extreme is an appropriate description of that position. (…)

One of the media companies that had pre-empted Jimmy Kimmel's show said it would return to broadcasting it after a pressure campaign from left-wing activists and celebrities.Sinclair Broadcast Group is the largest owner of ABC stations and had previously called Kimmel's comments about the Charlie Kirk assassination suspect "inappropriate and deeply insensitive."'While we understand that not everyone will agree with our decisions about programming, it is simply inconsistent to champion free speech while demanding that broadcasters air specific content.'In a press release on Friday morning, a spokesperson for the company said the show would return Friday night."Over the last week, we have received thoughtful feedback from viewers, advertisers, and community leaders representing a wide range of perspectives," read the statement. "We have also witnessed troubling acts of violence, including the despicable incident of a shooting at an ABC affiliate station in Sacramento. These events underscore why responsible broadcasting matters and why respectful dialogue between differing voices remains so important."The company went on to say that it had presented options to Disney, the parent company of ABC Television, in order to strengthen accountability and responsibility around similar issues. Disney did not adopt those policies."Our decision to preempt this program was independent of any government interaction or influence," the spokesperson continued. "Free speech provides broadcasters with the right to exercise judgment as to the content on their local stations. While we understand that not everyone will agree with our decisions about programming, it is simply inconsistent to champion free speech while demanding that broadcasters air specific content."RELATED: Warren faces continuing backlash over outlandish response to Kimmel controversy Sinclair had also been criticized by some for backing off of airing a Charlie Kirk tribute in place of the Kimmel show.Nexstar Media Group also suspended Kimmel's show and has not returned it to the airwaves as of Friday afternoon. Blaze News' request for comment to Nexstar was not immediately answered.Kimmel's return to the airwaves just a few days after his show's suspension was lauded by many on the left. He used the opportunity to criticize President Donald Trump but also tearfully applauded Charlie Kirk's widow for making a powerful statement by forgiving her husband's alleged assassin.Blaze News' request for comment from the Disney Corporation was not immediately answered.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!