Keion White, defensive lineman for the San Francisco 49ers, has emerged from surgery after being shot in the ankle at a Super Bowl party early Monday morning on Mission Street in downtown San Francisco. White had reportedly been involved in an argument about rapper “Lil Baby” and according to police an “unknown suspect” shot the 49er. This was not the first time a 49er had taken a bullet. On the afternoon of August 31, 2024, 49ers draft pick Ricky Pearsall was shopping near Union Square when a man approached and demanded his watch. Pearsall wasn’t giving it up and in the ensuing struggle took a gunshot in the chest. The bullet hit no vital organs and Pearsall survived. Police quickly apprehended the shooter, who was not named. “Police in San Francisco have identified a 17-year-old boy” in the shooting of Pearsall, NBC news reported. According to CNN,  “a 17-year-old boy attempted to rob Pearsall at gunpoint as he was walking alone at around 3:30 p.m. PT, when an altercation broke out between the two, resulting in both of them suffering injuries.” Anyone under age 16 could rob and murder the entire 49ers team … serve time only in juvenile prison, and gain release at age 25. People concerned about crime might spot a problem here. A male criminal suspect of 17 years merits description as a “juvenile” or “teen.” The “altercation” did not just “break out.” In the face of obvious danger, Ricky Pearsall bravely fought back. A gunshot to the chest is a “wound,” not an “injury,” which implies some sort of accident. This was an armed robbery. The 17-year old could not legally own a gun, so California’s myriad gun laws did not prevent the criminal from acquiring what news reports called a “semi-automatic firearm.” Gov. Gavin Newsom, former mayor of San Francisco, and state attorney general Rob Bonta, did not condemn the shooter or denounce the attack on Pearsall as “gun violence.” No photos of the shooter appeared, and he was described as a high-school senior from Tracy, California, some 70 miles from San Francisco. In 2016, California’s  Proposition 57 took away prosecutors’ ability to try juveniles as adults. San Francisco district attorney Brooke Jenkins told reporters, “there are five crime types for 16 and 17-year-olds, for which we would consider potentially seeking to transfer them to adult court. Attempted murder is one of those charges. And so again, it was for consideration.” In September 2025, judge Denise de Bellefeuille ruled that the assailant would be tried as a juvenile. At this writing, no word of any trial or sentence, and the shooter remains unidentified. In California, violent criminals can rob and shoot people like Ricky Pearsall with complete anonymity, but there’s more to it. In September 2019, Gov. Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill 1391, which bars all prosecution of those under 16 in adult court. Anyone under age 16 could rob and murder the entire 49ers team, be tried only in juvenile court, serve time only in juvenile prison, and gain release at age 25. At this writing, Gov. Newsom and attorney general Bonta have issued no official statement on the shooting of Keion White, and the suspect has yet to be identified. READ MORE from Lloyd Billingsley: WHO is Gavin Newsom? Canada, California, and Chinese Electric Cars A Different Midterm Milestone Lloyd Billingsley is a policy fellow at the Independent Institute in Oakland, Calif.  

Mashed potatoes, but upgraded - this creamy swap is richer and more stable than sour cream, and it adds just the right pop of brightness to every bite.

"Inflation is falling. The labor market is holding. Growth has been solid." The post Wall Street Journal: Trump Achieved Impossible With Economy appeared first on Frontpage Mag.

The emergency order suspends agricultural weight limits that enable farmers to move and harvest crops more efficiently

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Having already installed itself as the nation’s digital nanny with its online censorship law, the Online Safety Act, the government is now peering into the last remaining corner of online privacy and wondering whether it, too, might benefit from a sturdy padlock. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has confirmed that ministers are examining new powers to move beyond social media age limits and into the architecture of private browsing itself. The latest idea involves ID checks for VPN use and chatbots. Naturally, this is all for the children. A VPN, or virtual private network, is often treated like a villainous contraption, but it’s actually a tool that encrypts your internet traffic and masks your location. In plain English, it stops internet providers, advertisers, and sometimes governments from tracking what you read, watch, or search. Businesses use them for secure communications, journalists and activists use them to avoid profiling, and ordinary citizens use them because they do not fancy being cataloged like rare butterflies in a state-run specimen drawer. Their entire purpose is privacy and getting around censorship. Under the Online Safety Act, many websites and apps must now verify age through ID checks or facial scanning. Access to online spaces has been neatly stapled to identity documentation. Unsurprisingly, VPN use increased sharply once this regime came into force. When you tell a nation it must show its passport to read something mildly controversial, people tend to look for the digital equivalent of a back door. Now ministers are considering restrictions aimed specifically at under-18s using VPNs to bypass these age gates. In a public letter outlining the next phase of policy, Starmer wrote that the government is examining: “Limiting VPN access for kids: to make it harder for kids to get around age limits of services or certain functionalities.” The technical implications are major. To prevent minors from accessing VPN services, providers would have to verify users’ ages before granting encrypted connections. That means collecting identity data at the very point where users are seeking to shield their identity. A privacy tool that demands age documentation stops being a privacy tool in any meaningful sense. No credible VPN provider does ID checks for access. If they did, the entire premise would collapse. Starmer, a pro-digital ID prime minister who has supported jailing people for tweets, has argued that urgency is paramount. “Technology is moving really fast, and the law has got to keep up,” he said. His office has indicated that new delegated powers would allow ministers to introduce further controls without fresh primary legislation, enabling action “within months, rather than waiting years for new primary legislation every time technology evolves.” The government is also consulting on banning under-16s from social media entirely, restricting features such as infinite scroll and autoplay, and extending rules to AI chatbots. Starmer stated: “The action we took on Grok sent a clear message that no platform gets a free pass.” Technology Secretary Liz Kendall struck an even more posturing note: “I know that parents across the country want us to act urgently to keep their children safe online. That’s why I stood up to Grok and Elon Musk when they flouted British laws and British values. “We will not wait to take the action families need, so we will tighten the rules on AI chatbots and we are laying the ground so we can act at pace on the results of the consultation on young people and social media. “We are determined to give children the childhood they deserve and to prepare them for the future at a time of rapid technological change.” There it is again: urgency, childhood, protection. The language is comforting. It is also politically immaculate. Who wants to be the person arguing against children’s safety? Beneath the warm rhetoric lies something colder. Requiring identity papers to use encryption would hardwire state oversight into the basic mechanics of the internet. It reframes encryption itself as something to be gated and permissioned. VPNs are legal. They are widely used for legitimate security reasons. To put age verification at their entrance would be among the most far-reaching state interventions into online anonymity seen in a Western democracy. It would place the United Kingdom in uncomfortable company, closer in spirit to overt authoritarian regimes where encryption is treated as suspicious by default. Britain is already experiencing a decline in civil liberties that many observers find troubling. Expanding executive control over private browsing would be a statement about who ultimately governs the invisible spaces where citizens read, think, and explore. Wrapping this policy in the language of safety does not disguise what it represents: a government claiming the authority to decide when and how its citizens may browse in private. Of course, that is what Starmer wants. He is openly supportive of digital ID frameworks and has backed an overreaching approach to online speech. This is a political choice to expand executive control over private life. It should be confronted with the gravity it demands and the suspicion it has earned. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Keir Starmer Considers VPN ID Checks as UK Expands Online Safety Act Powers appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

The liberal media delights in reports of friction within the Trump administration, and Jake Tapper tried to turn one into reality on Sunday’s edition of CNN’s State of the Union. With border czar Tom Homan as his guest, Tapper repeatedly attempted to lure him into criticizing DHS Secretary Kristi Noem. Axios recently reported friction between the two, and Tapper clearly sought to exploit the issue. Tapper began by playing a clip of Noem saying that when it comes to elections, it’s important for DHS to be proactive “to make sure that we have the right people voting, electing the right leaders to lead this country.” Tapper invited Homan to interpret Noem’s statement about “electing the right leaders.” Homan demurred, saying that would be a question for the Secretary. But he added, actually defending Noem: “If I had to guess, probably that only those legally eligible to vote would vote.” @JakeTapper Tries To Lure Homan Into Bashing Noem — Border Czar Won't Bite pic.twitter.com/4tsLbpMhXm — Mark Finkelstein (@markfinkelstein) February 15, 2026 Tapper then pivoted to flattery. Quoting an unidentified Minnesota official, Tapper said Homan had been a “straight shooter,” “easier to work with,” and “a career cop,” whereas Noem and Greg Bovino, the former Border Patrol commander at large, were “actually insane.” Tapper pressed: “Why do you think Noem and Bovino struggled so much to work with local officials, the way you have successfully?” Homan wouldn’t bite, explaining instead that he met with Minnesota’s governor and attorney general, and the Minneapolis mayor because, “You can’t fix problems talking in an echo chamber. You’ve got to talk to the people that you may disagree with.” Tapper gushed: “You sound like an adult. You sound like an official who should be in charge of things.” Hoping the buttering-up had worked, Tapper tried again to get Homan to shiv Noem: “We’ve seen countless examples, again, this is not you, but do you agree that there are people in the Trump administration that are causing DHS to have a credibility problem?” The border czar refused to take the bait. “I’m not going to let the media divide this administration. Look, it’s one team, one fight.” Homan acknowledged that he and Noem don’t always agree, but said that’s what makes a strong team: “We bring different ideas to the table, then agree on a mission.” He then repeated the key line of the day: “It’s one team, one fight. I’m not going to divide this administration.” Poor Jake was forced to throw in the towel: “I hear what you’re saying. I’m not going to get you to criticize anybody.” In admitting defeat, Tapper exposed his goal: to tempt Homan into criticizing Noem. Tapper wouldn't want someone to goad him repeatedly into criticizing Anderson Cooper or Brian Stelter.  A for effort, Jake — but no cigar. Here's the transcript. CNN State of the Union 2/15/26 9:17 am ET JAKE TAPPER: DHS Secretary Noem made some comments that Democratic leader Schumer just commented on earlier in the show. I want to play them for you.  KRISTI NOEM: It may be one of the most important things that we need to make sure we trust, is reliable, and that when it gets to election day that we've been proactive to make sure that we have the right people voting, electing the right leaders to lead this country.  TAPPER: So, what does she mean when she says, electing the right leaders? That's not really immigration enforcement or DHS responsibility.  TOM HOMAN: I don't know. That'd be a question for the Secretary. If I had to guess, probably that, you know, only those legally eligible to vote would vote. But I have not talked to the Secretary about those statements. That'd be something she'd have to answer.  TAPPER: This week, after 74 days, you declared the immigration enforcement operation in Minnesota officially over. I talked to a local Minnesota official who told me the following, quote, Homan has been a straight shooter with us. He's easier for us to work with because he's a career cop and he knows how to talk with our law enforcement. Noem and Bovino were actually insane and not here to do anything other than put on a show, unquote.  Why do you think Noem and Bovino struggled so much to work with local officials, the way you have successfully, and carry out the kind of targeted operations that you've always advocated for?  HOMAN: Look, the president called me and asked me to go to Minnesota and asked me to get up there that same day, and I went up there. I just did things the way I've done for 40 years.  And I know a lot of people questioned, why are you meeting with the governor? Why are you meeting with the attorney general and Mayor Frey? I've always been, you can't fix problems talking in an echo chamber. You've got to talk to the people that you may disagree with. People have a different opinion on how you're doing it. I want to hear. I want to see what do you see as the issue? Why do you not agree with certain aspects of the operation? That's how you, in my experience, that's how you fix problems. You don't fix it in an echo chamber.  So I met with them, and look, we came out, I think it's safer in Minnesota, safer in Minneapolis, because now we have coordination in the jails that we didn't have before.  . . .  TAPPER: I mean, you sound like an adult. You sound like an official who should be in charge of things because you work with local officials and seek to deescalate and have targeted operations.  But there's this credibility issue now that DHS has had, not because of you, sir, but over and over, your colleagues who work on this issue, Noem, Bovino, DHS on social media, have said things to the American people that are simply not true.  The most recent example, perhaps, two immigration agents last month said that they shot a Venezuelan man in Minnesota after they were attacked with shovels and broom handles. Noem went on social media. She attacked Governor Walz and Mayor Frey over what she called an attempted murder of federal law enforcement. But then, testimony and video shown in court didn't back up the claim, and now ICE and the Justice Department are investigating whether those immigration officers lied. And we've seen countless examples, again, this is not you, but do you agree that there are people in the Trump administration that are causing DHS to have a credibility problem? HOMAN: Well, like I said in my first press conference in Minnesota, in those comments, the first thing I thought I was going to do, and I did, was bring more internal affairs officers to Minnesota to investigate the allegations. Allegations made, they need to be investigated. And, again, I won't discuss the investigations. We'll let the internal affairs and the Bureau investigate these allegations, and that's the right thing to do.  But I'm not going to let the media divide this administration. Look, it's one team, one fight.  And, you know, do me and Secretary Noem agree on everything? No. We have discussions and we have differences of opinion. That's what makes it a strong team. We bring different ideas to the table, then agree on a mission. But based on, you know, again, you can't work in an echo chamber. You want to hear different opinions, different, you know, how you think this should happen or that should happen. But in the end, we clear a mission. We have great success on it.  But it's one team, one fight. I'm not going to divide this administration. I'm going to just keep doing what the president wants me to do as the border czar, and we'll just keep going and doing what the president promised the American people. We've got the most secure border in the history of this nation, and we're arresting record numbers of criminal aliens in this country and deporting them, and we're going to keep doing it.  TAPPER: So, I'm not talking about differences of opinion. I'm just talking about facts and things that are not facts. But I hear what you're saying. I'm not going to get you to criticize anybody.  I appreciate your time today, Mr. Homan. Thanks so much.  HOMAN: Thank you, sir. 

Before you buy that smart fridge, find out which 5 brands Consumer Reports says are are facing multiple issues and you should avoid them at all costs.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has arrived in Hungary for talks with Prime Minister Viktor Orban Monday, ahead of elections where the nationalist leader faces a significant challenge from the opposition.

Uber plans to expand its food-delivery business into seven new European markets in 2026, launching services in markets including the Czech Republic, Greece, and Romania, a company spokesperson told Reuters on Sunday.

The FDA will consider a petition to revoke the safety status of dozens of processed refined carbohydrates unless food companies can prove they are safe and not contributing to health issues and obesity, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said...