Mysterious

'Cruel betrayal of a bill'

'Voters have minds of their own, and they decide whether they agree or disagree with what they hear.'

'Corruption, waste, and abuse that has gone unchecked'

Left-wing organizations, including the Women’s March, Indivisible, and the 50501 Movement, are preparing to “Free America” over Independence Day weekend by organizing nationwide anti-Trump protests. The “Free America Weekend” protests will “Free America from arbitrary firings and a flood of unlawful orders,” according to the Women’s March website. The organization plans to utilize “rallies, marches, […]

Vice President JD Vance cast the tie-breaking vote as the U.S. Senate approved its final version of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), 51-50, at midday Tuesday. That happy outcome for the Trump administration and congressional Republicans did not come without its share of high drama, much of which centered on language to phase […]

Last Friday, the Supreme Court held in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton that states can require pornographic websites to verify that users are over 18. States now have much more leeway to ensure that children are protected from internet pornography.  In 2023, Texas introduced the law challenged in Paxton. The law requires pornography websites to verify the age of visitors and prevent minors from accessing obscene content. Texas framed the law as a digital version of age restrictions for brick-and-mortar stores that sell pornographic material.  The Court upheld these in-person age restrictions in the 1968 case Ginsberg v. New York, which involved a New York law that prohibited brick-and-mortar stores from selling pornographic magazines to children. The Court held that the law was constitutional—it protected children without violating adults’ First Amendment rights to view such material.  Although it’s both counterintuitive and ahistorical, the Court has for a long time held that pornography is protected free speech, at least when adults want to access it. For children, on the other hand, pornography is not entitled to protection.   Ginsberg was based on this dichotomy. Adults have a right to access pornography, but because children are more vulnerable, states can restrict children’s access to obscene speech in ways that would be unconstitutional if applied to adults.   But things get complicated when a law that restricts children’s access to pornography has incidental effects on adults’ access.   A group of pornographers—calling themselves the “Free Speech Coalition”—sued, claiming that Texas’ law hampered adults’ ability to exercise their First Amendment right to view sexually explicit content. The theory was that if adults are required to submit identifying information over the internet to access pornography, which could be hacked or leaked to the public, then they might be less eager to look at pornography, which means their free speech rights would be “chilled.”   In short, they argued that a law restricting children’s access to pornography that imposes any secondary burden on adults’ access to pornography is unconstitutional.   The Supreme Court disagreed. Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the majority, identified “two principles” that dictate how a state can protect children from sexually explicit material: “A State may not prohibit adults from accessing content that is obscene only to minors,” but “it may enact laws to prevent minors from accessing such content.” He concluded that Texas’ age-verification requirement is an “ordinary and appropriate”—and constitutional—way to achieve the latter.  To reach this conclusion, Thomas first determined that Texas’ age-verification law had only an “incidental” effect on adults’ access to protected sexually explicit speech. Although age verification is a burden, it’s small enough that it isn’t a constitutional problem.   Thomas reasoned that Texas’ law “simply requires adults to verify their age before they can access speech that is obscene to children,” but doesn’t cut off their access to such content. Thus, the law “shield[s] children from sexually explicit content” without unconstitutionally restricting adults’ free speech.  The dissent by Justice Elena Kagan, which was joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, argued that the Court analyzed the law under the wrong standard. Thomas applied a judicial standard called intermediate scrutiny, which is difficult but not impossible for laws to survive. Writing for the dissent, Kagan argued that the Court should have applied strict scrutiny instead—a type of review often described as “strict in theory, fatal in fact.”   As Thomas pointed out, in its First Amendment cases, the Supreme Court has upheld only one law under strict scrutiny. This history shows that when a law receives strict scrutiny it’s almost guaranteed to be struck down. Although Kagan claimed that strict scrutiny in this case “need not be a death sentence,” she did not explain whether or how this law or one like it could survive strict scrutiny, which might suggest that she thinks it would not.  Despite the dissenters’ reservations, the Court’s decision in Paxton marks an important step forward in the fight to protect children’s safety online. Twenty-one states have implemented age-verification requirements like Texas’, which gives this decision wide-ranging impact. By upholding the Texas law, the Court gave states a powerful tool to keep children safe by protecting them from harmful, obscene content.   The post Supreme Court Upholds Porn Age-Verification Law appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Following the Sean “Diddy” Combs sex trafficking trial verdict, prominent AI chatbots answered whether it is morally wrong to pay for sex. Their answers were disappointing. Although OpenAI’s ChatGPT did agree that almost all prostitution was morally wrong, xAI’s Grok, Google’s Gemini and Meta AI hedged on whether it is wrong to pay for sex when asked Wednesday. Google’s Gemini gave the worst answer among ChatGPT’s, Grok’s and Meta AI’s responses. The search giant’s AI chatbot outrageously concluded that when it comes to whether paying for sex is morally wrong there are “strong arguments on both sides.”  [Story Continues on MRC Free Speech America] 

U.S. Federal Housing Finance Agency Director William Pulte called for a congressional investigation into Jerome Powell, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, and for his removal from the position.President Donald Trump has been rhetorically attacking Powell for many months over his refusal to lower interest rates, despite inflation nearing the limit that Powell had set for lowering rates. Powell has previously said that he will not step down as chair if the president asks. 'All inflation forecasts for the United States went up materially as a consequence of the tariffs. We didn’t overreact; in fact, we didn’t react at all.'Pulte pointed to reports of the $2.5 billion renovation of the Fed's headquarters in Washington, D.C., to demand the investigation.“I am asking Congress to investigate Chairman Jerome Powell, his political bias, and his deceptive Senate testimony, which is enough to be removed ‘for cause,’” Pulte said on social media.“Jerome Powell’s $2.5B Building Renovation Scandal stinks to high heaven, and he lied when asked about the specifics before Congress. This is nothing short of malfeasance and is worthy of ‘for cause.’”Pulte also accused Powell of lying when he denied some of the allegations about the renovation.“All of the inflammatory things the media carried are not in the current plan,” Powell said. “There is no VIP dining room, no new marble, no special elevators. No new water features, no beehives and no roof terrace gardens.”Powell has signaled that a rate drop might be in the future but asserted that the uncertainty surrounding the president's tariffs policies have led to reticence from the Federal Reserve from acting too quickly.“All inflation forecasts for the United States went up materially as a consequence of the tariffs. We didn’t overreact; in fact, we didn’t react at all," said Powell. "We’re simply taking some time. As long as the U.S. economy is in solid shape, we think the prudent thing to do is to wait and learn more, and see what those effects might be. They haven’t really shown up, so, for now, we’re waiting.”RELATED: Trump rips into Fed Chair Jerome Powell for not lowering interest rates and suggests he'll be fired soon Critics of the president say that the Federal Reserve was instituted as an independent entity in order to prevent political considerations from biasing monetary policies. Supporters of the president say Powell and other Fed bank presidents are already politically biased.The Fed is composed of 12 regional banks, each with their own president, and sets monetary policy. Its mission is to guide interest rates in order to avoid major job losses on one hand while also preventing high inflation on the other. Powell was appointed as Fed chairman by Trump in his first term. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A challenger to traditional banking has finally emerged, and it is coming from the right wing.After billionaire Palmer Luckey was reported to be starting a cryptocurrency venture, it was unclear how big the scope would be and if it would work only in digital currencies.Now that public filings have emerged, the new project was revealed to have major conservative backing while literally giving traditional banks a run for their money.'The bank will be a national bank ... providing traditional banking products.'Blaze News reported last week that Luckey had teamed up with Joe Lonsdale to start the new company; Lonsdale co-founded Palantir Technologies with Luckey and has his own software companies, as well. At the same time, Lonsdale's venture firm 8VC led a $225 million fundraising round for the new company to meet federal regulatory requirements.The tech entrepreneurs were first thought to be starting a bank that would work primarily on maximizing returns for tech startups, but recent filings revealed much more is in store. According to the Financial Times, the new company has applied for a national bank charter, which would it give license to operate as a typical banking institution.The Times also revealed a new right-wing mega-donor has joined the mix.RELATED: Palmer Luckey-led crypto bank promises startups a capital hoard safe from scheming feds Palmer Luckey, founder of Anduril Industries, during an interview on 'The Circuit with Emily Chang' at Anduril's headquarters in Costa Mesa, California, US, on Thursday, Dec. 14, 2023. Anduril recently beat several legacy defense players in a contest for a major contract to develop an unmanned fighter jet for the US Air Force and is now valued at $8.5 billion. Photographer: Kyle Grillot/Bloomberg via Getty Images None other than Peter Thiel and his venture capital fund, the Founders Fund, will also be backing the startup, according to two of the Times' sources.Thiel is, of course, known for giving millions to Republican campaigns over the years, including over a million dollars to President Donald Trump for his 2016 campaign.This new undertaking, dubbed Erebor, is yet another one of Luckey's companies named after themes found in J.R.R. Tolkien books. This one refers to the mountain in "The Hobbit," where the dragon Smaug hoards his gold. His other companies, Anduril and Palantir, are references to a character's sword and a magical seeing stone, respectively.Filings revealed, "The bank will be a national bank ... providing traditional banking products, as well as virtual currency-related products and services, for businesses and individuals."Adding to previous speculation, the target market was listed as businesses that are part of the American "innovation economy," including tech companies focused on virtual currencies, artificial intelligence, or defense manufacturing.RELATED: The One Big Beautiful Bill Act hides a big, ugly AI betrayal A Bitcoin Teller Machine in San Francisco, California, US, on Monday, Dec. 30, 2024. The Bitcoin rally sparked by US President-elect Donald Trump's election victory in early November is stalling as 2024 draws to a close. Photographer: David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images Erebor will work with stablecoins, cryptocurrency tied to relatively stable assets like the U.S. dollar or gold. This is done to limit the volatility of a coin without sacrificing its benefits, creating investment opportunities far in excess of simply purchasing and holding, say, Bitcoin.For example, President Trump works with the stablecoin USD1, which is attached to the U.S. dollar."Longtime crypto people know it's a fine line between being targeted by government and being co-opted by government," explained Blaze Media's James Poulos. "But it's hard to strike the right balance without risking the worst of both worlds — a crypto economy that regulators tolerate but can destroy or manipulate with the wave of a hand."Poulos added that the most stable compromise naturally involves figures that Washington relies on in other high-tech industries, "however much freedom-loving 'maxis' wish that weren't the case.""Regardless, it doesn't matter how perfect a balance the kingpins of crypto and banking might strike if Bitcoin (to take the biggest example) falls short of its potential as a peer-to-peer currency and becomes just another place for established wealth to accrue value," Poulos concluded.Erebor's filing said it plans on working with non-U.S. companies that are "seeking access to the U.S. banking system," according to the filing, and said it would "differentiate itself" by working with customers who are not well served by "traditional or disruptive financial institutions."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!