Sir Keir Starmer faced Left-wing backlash after unveiling his plan to curb immigration. The left wing in the UK is as crazy as our left wing. The Prime Minister warned that without firm immigration rules, the UK risked “becoming an island of strangers”. He also said very high immigration levels in recent years had caused […] The post UK PM Imposes Stricter Rules on Immigration & His House Was Set on Fire appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

Chuckie Schumer is trying to blame Donald Trump for a Mexican Naval tall ship crashing into the Brooklyn Bridge. The vessel is used for cadet training. He conjured up a reason in his cauldron out of thin air. Schumer on the Brooklyn Bridge incident and Vehicle Traffic Services or VTS: “There are indications that this […] The post Schumer Fabricates a Reason for the Mexican Ship Crash So He Can Blame Trump appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

"You want this done right, or do you want this done quickly?"

'A massive cover-up'

'Unapologetically conservative'

Geologists recently unearthed the vertebrae of a giant prehistoric marine lizard during fieldwork. Measuring a full 7 inches across, an extrapolation of that size would place the animal among the largest ever to swim in the prehistoric precursor to the Gulf of Mexico. “I … was completely awe-struck by its size,” said James Starnes, a […] The post Evidence of Ancient 30-foot ‘Sea Monster’ Uncovered by Geologists: A Mosasaur in Mississippi appeared first on Good News Network.

On the latest installment of CNN State of the Union, an unrepentant Jake Tapper devoted a segment to promoting his upcoming Original Sin, co-written with Alex Thompson of Axios. The promotional segment makes clear, however, that Tapper appears unwilling to take personal responsibility for his own role, and that of the broader media, in perpetrating the biggest political fraud upon the American people: the concealment of President Joe Biden’s cognitive decline. Instead, Tapper shifts blame to the Democrats who, in his words, “paved the way for that which they feared the most.” JAKE TAPPER: And a small, secretive group of advisers kept his worried Cabinet in the dark. The presidency requires someone who can perform at 2:00 a.m. during an emergency. Cabinet secretaries in his own administration told us that, by 2024, President Biden could not be relied upon for that. And yet, until the debate and even weeks after, those in power stayed quiet. They were convinced that they were saving the country from the existential threat of Donald Trump, as they saw it, and that only Biden could beat Trump. But, instead, what they did was they paved the way for that which they feared the most. Indeed, for those who tried to justify the behavior described in our book because of the threat of a second Trump term, those fears should have shocked them into reality, not away from it. If Tapper delivered this sanctimonious editorial on the advice of crisis communications counsel, then he may want to consider demanding a refund. In the face of withering criticism from all sides of the aisle, Tapper remains unwilling to consider the role that media had in stifling any questioning of Biden’s cognitive decline, which was evident to anyone with two eyes and half a brain well before the 2020 election.  Recall Tapper tearing at Lara Trump for daring to raise the specter of a diminished Biden: Seems like a good time to remind everyone that in 2020 Jake Tapper, first, accused me of making fun of people with a stutter (an atrocious accusation) and then attempted to shut me down and ended our interview when I tried to warn people of Joe Biden’s very obvious cognitive… pic.twitter.com/ZOxSGQP13J — Lara Trump (@LaraLeaTrump) June 27, 2024 No matter how much Tapper may want to distract otherwise, and no matter how much elected Democrats may want to talk about turning the page, the real “original sin” remains the media’s unwillingness to report on what everyone else saw as plain as day, going back to 2019.  Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned segment as aired on CNN State of the Union on Sunday, May 18th, 2025: JAKE TAPPER: Welcome back to State of the Union. Right around the time that the 2024 election was called for Donald Trump, I started working with Axios' Alex Thompson, whose reporting on President Biden I admired. And I made a pitch to him. He and I should start working on a project to explain what just happened and how President Trump, who was not particularly popular at the time, got elected again in a commanding victory. According to the top Democrats that we spoke with at the time, the reason for this was clear. The stunning election result traced back to the original sin of the 2024 election, President Biden's decision to run for reelection, even though he would be theoretically 86 years old at the end of his second term, and was showing every day of it. And the result is our new book, "Original Sin," which comes out on Tuesday. Our goal with the book was simple, to present the disturbing reality of what happened in the White House and the Democratic presidential campaign in 2023-2024, as told to us by more than 200 people, including lawmakers, White House and campaign insiders, some of whom may never publicly acknowledge speaking to us, but all of whom know the truth within the pages of the book, basically, how this guy became this guy. What we learned was going on behind the scenes stunned us. Some people were willing to go on the record. David Plouffe, who ran the Obama and Harris campaigns, did not hold back -- quote -- "We got so screwed by Biden as a party," Plouffe told us, "referring to Biden's decision to run for reelection, then wait more than three weeks to bow out. Plouffe added: "He totally effed us." Others, of course, remained publicly silent, despite the entire world seeing what had gone very, very wrong during the debate on June 27. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) BIDEN: Making sure that we're able to make every single solitary person eligible for what I have been able to do with the -- with the COVID. Excuse me, with dealing with everything we have to do with... (END VIDEO CLIP) TAPPER: What we saw that night wasn't a cold. It wasn't somebody underprepared or overprepared. It was the logical result of a president who had been deteriorating for years, most precipitously declining in 2023 and 2024, a president who had began his term telling voters to watch him if they had questions about his age. By the end, his aides and his doctor were even privately discussing whether or not he would need to be in a wheelchair after the election. And a small, secretive group of advisers kept his worried Cabinet in the dark. The presidency requires someone who can perform at 2:00 a.m. during an emergency. Cabinet secretaries in his own administration told us that, by 2024, President Biden could not be relied upon for that. And yet, until the debate and even weeks after, those in power stayed quiet. They were convinced that they were saving the country from the existential threat of Donald Trump, as they saw it, and that only Biden could beat Trump. But, instead, what they did was they paved the way for that which they feared the most. Indeed, for those who tried to justify the behavior described in our book because of the threat of a second Trump term, those fears should have shocked them into reality, not away from it. In a statement to CNN, a Biden spokesman criticized the book, saying -- quote -- "We continue to await anything that shows where Joe Biden had to make a presidential decision or where national security was threatened or where he was unable to do his job. In fact, the evidence points to the opposite. He was a very effective president" -- unquote. To that, I say, read the book and you will see examples of that. But, regardless, Democrats are now in the wilderness and they are trying to figure out how to regain the trust of the American people. Months after Biden's debacle and Harris' loss, they're torn between trying to appeal to base voters focused on Trump, who don't want to hear any criticism of Biden, and those who are angry about what the Bidens did. It's a real tightrope. Here's what top Democrats in Congress had to say this week when asked about what we uncovered in our book. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) HAKEEM JEFFRIES: House Democrats have been very clear we're moving forward. We're not looking backward. CHUCK SCHUMER: We're looking forward. KASIE HUNT: That's it? SCHUMER: That's it. (END VIDEO CLIP) TAPPER: And here are two prominent Democratic governors positioning themselves for a run in 2028 asked about whether they knew about Biden's decline. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) PRITZKER: I saw him a few times. I certainly went to the White House. To the extent people are now saying, well, we thought about whether he should have a wheelchair, I never heard any of that. I never saw any of that. WHITMER: As a governor at a state halfway across the country who was working her tail off, I was busy working. (END VIDEO CLIP) TAPPER: As Politico's Adam Wren and Holly Otterbein write, quote: "Some Democrats argue that their leaders aren't owning up to the truth about Biden and risk keeping the issue alive indefinitely as a result. They fear that Democrats' record low approval ratings are tied in part to their unwillingness to come clean", unquote. So, the big question, how long will Democratic leaders be able to walk this line? The book comes out Tuesday. You will not believe what we found out.  

The Los Angeles Chargers' director of social media defended the team's right to make humorous content after other teams removed posts that were determined to be "insensitive."The controversy started when the Indianapolis Colts took part in what now seems like a tradition for NFL teams to release lighthearted videos to announce their upcoming schedules. The Colts apparently went too far, however, when they turned Miami Dolphins wide receiver Tyreek Hill into a cartoon dolphin and mocked his 2024 run-in with Miami-Dade Police.'Luckily we work at a place that values social [media] and the ability to make a joke.'The perceived backlash — which apparently no one could pinpoint — was enough that the Colts took down their video and issued an apology."We removed our schedule release video because it exceeded our rights with Microsoft and included an insensitive clip involving Dolphins wide receiver Tyreek Hill. We sincerely apologize to Microsoft and Tyreek," the team said in a statement.The retraction included an apology to Microsoft due to the Colts' video animation style mimicking Microsoft's game Minecraft.In fact, the video seemed strikingly similar to that of the Chargers, who actually acquired permission from Microsoft to use their intellectual property in their schedule release video.Given the similarity and the subsequent apology, CNN asked the head of the Chargers' social media about the content of their video and the reaction the Colts had received, wondering, "How far is too far?"RELATED: Indianapolis Colts cave to invisible mob, delete hilarious video poking fun at Tyreek Hill despite his approval Allie Raymond (left) and Megan Julian (right) of the Chargers' social media team. Carlin Stiehl / Los Angeles Times via Getty ImagesDolphins reporter Joe Schad said the Chargers' social media head defended making a joke and putting out witty content."Luckily we work at a place that values social [media] and the ability to make a joke," said Megan Julian, director of digital and social media for the Chargers. "Not everything has to be serious all the time," she added. — (@) It did not take long for fans to react positively to the refreshing take from Julian, which was seemingly the inverse of how the Colts organization handled the situation."We desperately need that mind set for the social media team with the Dolphins," one fan replied."Make America joke again!" another fan chimed in.A photojournalist for a Fox outlet added, "A lot of NFL organizations could learn from this."RELATED: NFL cancels DEI event, yet still makes ridiculous diversity statement about its fans and hiring women The Chargers' social media team produces content at Chargers HQ on Friday, May 9, 2025 in Los Angeles, CA. (Carlin Stiehl / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)"If you're going to go for the joke, and take a page from the Chargers' social media, just go for it," sports reporter Alejandro Avila told Blaze News.He added, "I have no idea why the Colts would take that down," as it did not seem to offend anyone.Not even Hill, the apparent victim in the ordeal, took offense to the video."He laughed about it and didn't think they needed to take it down on his account," Hill's agent, Drew Rosenhaus, stated. The agent noted that his client was also willing to accept the Colts organization's apology, even though it was not necessary.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Until recently, “woke” was a term that anti-Marxist liberals, nationalists, and conservatives had in common. It was a term we could use to communicate with one another and understand one another in our post-2015 battle against a virulent and ascendant strain of neo-Marxist revolution. In other words, the term “woke” played an important role in building a broad coalition that looked like it could be strong enough to defeat this enemy. It was a pretty big achievement for such a small word. But now a handful of anti-woke liberals have decided to turn this formerly unifying, coalition-building term into a weapon to use against the right. True, some of the most malicious liberals have been intentionally using “woke right” to cover just about the entire nationalist right, whereas other, more naive liberals, having taken the bait, are trying to apply the term “woke right” only to what used to be called the “alt-right” or “white nationalists.” I get it. I really do. I understand that some of the liberals who’ve been pumping up the term “woke right” are deceitful scoundrels and that others are just honestly, nerdishly trying to work out a way of answering real questions in political theory that bother them. But for present purposes, it doesn’t matter if you’re a deceitful scoundrel or an earnest nerd. Every liberal using the term “woke right” is being a schmuck. What they are all doing is taking a flag and a symbol that for 10 years was highly effective at rallying opposition to the neo-Marxist revolution — and worked well to cement a coalition that could defeat it — and throwing that flag to the ground and trampling on it so it can’t be used any more. Yes, you schmucks, “woke” always meant exactly one thing: It referred to that part of the neo-Marxist left that liberals, conservatives, nationalists, Christians, and Jews had to join forces to defeat. And by repurposing that term as a weapon against this coalition, you’ve turned it into gall in our mouths. You’ve taken a shared term of discourse, gutted its common and universally accepted meaning, and mangled it so we can’t use it to talk to one another any more. Targeting the anti-woke coalition This is why so many on the nationalist right are so amazed by the treachery of certain anti-Marxist liberals who have been promoting the theory of the “woke right” — and by the wretched folly of so many other liberals who have walked right into the trap. Turning the term “woke” on the nationalist right isn’t just redefining any old term. It’s a betrayal. A betrayal that, if it goes through, will mean the end of the anti-woke coalition that looked, for a few short months, like it could actually win. Sure, there were always different streams on the right. There was always an “alt-right” (as Richard Spencer called it) or a “white nationalist” right that set itself up in opposition to mainstream nationalist conservatives. There was also the “dissident right,” which had a somewhat broader reach. Then there were mainstream nationalist conservatives (or “NatCons”). These were all well known and reasonably accurate terms for talking about the various movements on the political right. And of course, if you didn’t feel like using reasonably accurate terms, you could always use the corporate left-wing media’s go-to favorites like “illiberal right” and “Christian nationalist right” — typically employed when the idea was to deplore everyone who wasn’t a liberal. In other words, there were plenty of terms available for those anti-Marxist liberals who just wanted to criticize various factions of the right. Those terms existed, and everyone knew what they were referring to. Why they’re using this term So why weren’t all these existing terms good enough? Why did some of the super-geniuses who spend their time competing for the title of grand poobah in the anti-Marxist liberal camp feel like they had to manufacture this entirely new term — “woke right” — and work day and night to get it to take off? Obviously, it was because, in the eyes of a few anti-Marxist liberals, “woke right” had advantages that more accurate terms like “alt-right” or “white nationalist right” didn’t have. Let’s count the advantages these aspiring poobahs thought they could milk out of using “woke right” instead: 1. “Woke right” is intentionally designed to be humiliating. The whole point of the term “woke right” is to target people who have devoted their best efforts for years — often with serious personal and professional consequences — to mounting a viable opposition to the “woke” left. The whole point is to tell them: Sorry, pal, but you’re not a whit better than the Maoist revolutionaries you were out there fighting. And coming out of the mouths of anti-Marxist liberals who were at least sometimes out there on the barricades with us, that is in fact a pretty demeaning thing to hear. 2. “Woke right” is perfect for virtue-signaling. Because the term “woke right” signals a rupture and a betrayal of the coalition that some anti-Marxist liberals forged with the right, it serves as proof of ideological purity. It says: As for me, I’m still untainted. I will keep delegitimizing and canceling nationalists and conservatives forever. 3. “Woke right” succeeds as a provocation where previous terms of contempt like “illiberal right” and “Christian nationalism” failed. The fact is, the term “woke right” really has outraged many nationalist conservatives. And for a small number of especially thuggish liberal trolls, causing that upset and confusion in the ranks of nationalist conservatives is a good in itself. 4. “Woke right” is a term that neutralizes the power of the term “woke” to forge a broad coalition between anti-Marxist liberals and nationalist conservatives. The term “woke right” destroys the flag and symbol of that broad, anti-Marxist coalition and makes it impossible to rally around it any longer. 5. “Woke right” is a term that actively works to destroy the possibility of mutual respect, political alliance, and friendship between anti-Marxist liberals and the nationalist right. Because of its strong connotations of intentional humiliation and provocation, betrayal, and the destruction of shared symbols, getting this term into wide circulation is the best weapon anyone has come up with yet to ensure that anti-Marxist liberals and nationalist conservatives will truly despise one another and do everything possible to avoid working together going forward. So that’s a lot of reasons why an anti-Marxist liberal might want to use the term “woke right” instead of more accurate, established terms. But notice that he would only use this new term if his goal was to drive a wedge between liberals and the nationalist right, increase mutual distrust and mutual resentment, and cripple the ability of the two camps to pursue common aims. That’s why I say that every one of you anti-Marxist liberals using this term is being a schmuck. Because either you are purposely trying to destroy the anti-woke coalition, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, or you are completely clueless about the damage you’re doing to the anti-woke coalition and don’t have the political sense to know when you’re being played like a fiddle and who’s playing you. Either way, there’s an old political term for what you’re doing. You’re being a schmuck. A common effort endangered There are lots of things I find aggravating and distasteful about having to work with liberals to achieve common aims. But probably the worst is the way that certain big-shot liberals continue to find ever-new ways of expressing their disgust and loathing for their nationalist and conservative allies — no matter how much their nationalist and conservative colleagues may have contributed to a common political effort and no matter how recent the memory of it. Some readers may be too young to remember the end of the Cold War. So for them, let me just add a relevant historical comment. If you want to know what happened in 1989 to transform the victorious anti-communist alliance between liberals and conservatives into a dystopian reality in which liberals worldwide ended up trying to grind their former nationalist and conservative allies into the ground — well, it looked exactly like what we’re seeing with this “woke right” campaign. After the fall of the Berlin Wall, a small group of fanatical liberal commissars decided that the victory over communism was the perfect moment to try for a world without nationalists and without real conservatives in any positions of influence anywhere. When they spoke of a “unipolar” world, they didn’t mean that America was going to be the single great power on earth. What they meant was that their liberalism was going to be the single great power on earth, so that no one with any power or influence would ever be anything other than a liberal again. Francis Fukuyama’s grotesque fantasy about banishing anyone driven by “thymos” to jungles at the edges of the political world was only the best known example of this ideal. It seems like we’re going through an attempted replay of this same liberal fantasy now, although still on a much smaller scale. A small number of fanatical liberal commissars are giddy with the feeling that the Berlin Wall has fallen again. They think (mistakenly) that the war against “woke” is basically over and that our side has already won. They think (mistakenly) that they can safely turn their attention to trying to remove nationalists and genuine conservatives from whatever positions of influence they’ve succeeded in gaining in the last 10 years. I admit that for now, this effort still looks pathetic. The anti-Marxist liberals who really believe these things are still just a fanatical few. But when you see how quickly they’ve hoodwinked so many in their camp into embarking on an immediate war against their nationalist and conservative coalition partners, it just makes your head spin. Donald Trump and JD Vance were right to bring anti-Marxist liberals into their coalition and into their administration. They could not have won without broadening their appeal. And that broad coalition will be needed for many years to come if any part of the nationalist and conservative agenda is going to be implemented in reality. But there won’t be much hope of holding this coalition together if certain fanatical, anti-Marxist liberal commissars continue inflating the lie that nationalist conservatives are an imminent threat to all things good and beautiful — “just like the left.” Editor’s note: The second edition of Yoram Hazony’s award-winning book, “The Virtue of Nationalism,” will be published in June and is available for pre-order now.