News Outlander Diana Gabaldon Confirms Outlander Show Will End Differently Than Books There simply aren’t enough seasons (or episodes) left to adapt all of the books in the series. By Vanessa Armstrong | Published on August 26, 2024 Credit: Starz Comment 0 Share New Share Credit: Starz While the second half of Outlander’s seventh season is set to premiere on Starz in a couple of months, we know that the end of the series is in sight. The show has already been greenlit for an eighth season, and with that renewal came the news that Outlander would hang up its kilt after those episodes. Readers of Gabaldon’s books, however, know that there are nine books already published, with the author currently working on the tenth installment of the series. On her Facebook page in the comments section for a post giving an excerpt from the tenth book (via RadioTimes), she shared that season seven roughly ends with the events in her seventh book, An Echo in the Bone. That still leaves three books that the show hasn’t covered—Written in my Own Heart’s Blood, Go Tell the Bees that I Am Gone, and Book Ten, which Gabaldon is currently working on—and only ten episodes to cover them all. “It really won’t resemble the end of the book series,” she wrote, later adding, “in normal circumstances—one book per season—they can fit roughly 10% of the book’s content into the show. How much of the (VERY roughly speaking) 1,200,000 words of those three books do you think they can get into ten hours of television? Obviously, they’re going to have to cherry-pick some prime scenes/threads to film, and try to fit them into a framework that makes sense for one season, and that they can bring to a reasonably satisfactory conclusion.” In the same vein, Gabaldon said in response to another comment that “there won’t be that much of Book Ten in the final episode of the show,” not surprising given that she’s currently writing it, though she did give the showrunners a synopsis and pieces of dialogue. We’ll eventually be able to see what the showrunners do with Gabaldon’s source material. The remainder of season seven premieres on Starz on November 22, 2024. No news yet on when season eight will make its way to the network. [end-mark] The post Diana Gabaldon Confirms <i>Outlander</i> Show Will End Differently Than Books appeared first on Reactor.

Ignorance is bliss. It’s also Vice President Kamala Harris’ secret weapon. The American people can make wise voting decisions, but only when they have quite enough information to do so. Alas, an Aug. 14 Media Research Center survey confirms that most 2020 Biden-Harris voters know shockingly little about her far-left record. Staggering majorities of the 800 registered Democrats and 400 independents in McLaughlin & Associates’ poll were stunningly unfamiliar with Harris’ neo-Marxist words and deeds. Last week’s Democratic National Convention taught her voters far more about Harris’ passion for cooking than about her extremist statements and actions: Harris would consider enfranchising death row inmates. Don Lemon asked her at an April 22, 2019, CNN town hall if imprisoned felons “like the Boston Marathon bomber, on death row, people who are convicted of sexual assault, they should be allowed to vote?” Rather than laugh at this concept, Harris said: “I think we should have that conversation.” Among those surveyed, 86% were unaware or unsure of her views on turning every death row into a voting precinct. Then-Sen. Kamala Harris, D–Calif., approved banning private health insurance: Harris advocated Medicare for All, a British-style socialized medicine program. When NBC’s Lester Holt asked Democratic presidential contenders, “Who here would abolish their private health insurance in favor of a government-run plan?” Harris raised her hand. Of those polled, 81% were unacquainted with Harris’ desire to junk their private medical policies. Harris promoted freedom for violent protesters during the summer of 2020’s George Floyd riots. She urged supporters via Facebook and Twitter to “chip in” donations for the Minnesota Freedom Fund. MFF bailed out rioters. Some then attacked and killed people. That was news to 78% of those polled.  Some 71% were astonished that Harris backed defunding the police. She told Nick Cannon of Power 106-FM in Los Angeles: “We have to redirect resources” from law enforcement to schools and small businesses. “For too long, people have confused achieving public safety with putting more cops on the street.” Harris suggested abolishing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. On June 24, 2018, MSNBC’s Kasie Hunt asked if she agreed with a supporter’s “Abolish U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement” placard. Harris said, “We’ve got to critically reexamine U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement,” and added, “we need to probably think about starting from scratch.” That surprised 77% of Biden-Harris voters. In 2019, GovTrack ranked Harris the most liberal/least conservative U.S. senator—left of socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. GovTrack gave her a 0.00% conservative rating and Sanders a slightly more right-wing 0.02%. GovTrack self-censored its scorecard, but Internet Archives’ priceless Wayback Machine preserved it. Among participants, 75% were new to Harris as the Senate’s No. 1 leftist. Her cosponsorship of the uberliberal Green New Deal escaped 73% of respondents. Harris disagrees that illegal aliens who invade America are criminals. “I know what a criminal looks like who’s committing a crime,” she told CBS News. “An undocumented immigrant is not a criminal.” Of those asked, 74% had not heard her statement. So, why do so many know so little about so much of Harris’ record? The Media Research Center’s subjects chiefly rely on broadcast and cable TV news. The MRC says that its “examination of ABC, CBS, and NBC evening news coverage in the three weeks since Harris became the leading Democratic candidate (July 21 to Aug. 10) shows eight of these 10 issues received ZERO attention from these newscasts, while two others received only minor coverage.” That’s right: Zero airtime—positive, negative, or neutral—on eight of the Democrat presidential nominee’s highly relevant positions. Two other policies earned cursory coverage: Harris endorsed slavery reparations and briefly visited the U.S.-Mexico border—once. This is media malpractice. Conservatives must use rallies, speeches, broadcast and digital ads, print, social media, emails, text messages, billboards, one-on-one discussions, dormitory debates, smoke signals, and carrier pigeons to educate Democrats and independents on what they do not know about Harris, starting with these 10 frightening facts. Ignorance is bliss, but the truth will set America free. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post What Harris’ Voters Don’t Know About Her Could Hurt America appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Many on the Left suggest that concerns about illegal aliens casting votes in a presidential election are unfounded. After all, illegal aliens can’t legally vote. Yet a new poll suggests that most Americans expect that illegals will be allowed to vote in the Nov. 5 election. When asked, “How likely is it that a large number of illegal immigrants will be allowed to vote in this year’s elections?” more than half of respondents (56%) said it is “very likely” (27%) or “somewhat likely” (27%). About a third (36%) said it is “somewhat likely” (17%) or “not very likely” (19%), while one in 10 said they weren’t sure. Most self-identified Republicans (79%) said it was “somewhat likely” (36%) or “very likely” (43%) that illegal aliens would be allowed to vote, but even a sizable number of Democrats (30%) agreed, saying it is “somewhat likely” (19%) or “very likely” (11%). More than half of independents (53%) said it was “somewhat likely” (24%) or “very likely” (29%). The vast majority of respondents (75%) said they either “strongly oppose” (60%) or “somewhat oppose” (15%) “allowing people who are not U.S. citizens to vote in elections for the president and members of Congress.” About a fifth (19%) of respondents said they “strongly favor” (8%) or “somewhat favor” (11%) allowing noncitizens to vote. Self-identified Democrats proved most likely to support noncitizen voting, although only 25% of them said they did. Independents proved least likely to support it, at 84%. Self-identified Republicans also opposed it, at 82%. A recent study from Just Facts estimates that 10%-27% of noncitizens are registered to vote, and based on previous elections and federal data, at least 1-2.7 million noncitizens will vote in the Nov. 5 presidential election. Since 2021, border authorities have apprehended approximately 10 million illegal aliens at the U.S.-Mexico border, and authorities know that at least 1.66 million illegal aliens got away from authorities from fiscal year 2021 (which started in October 2020) through fiscal year 2023. EXCLUSIVE: Internal CBP data I obtained via FOIA request reveals 13 years of known gotaways data at the border, showing gotaways have *exploded* under the Biden admin compared to the Trump & Obama years. This is the first time these numbers have ever been revealed. FY2010… pic.twitter.com/LUQU5v87b2— Bill Melugin (@BillMelugin_) May 15, 2024 Many of these “gotaways” don’t stay in the country; neither do some of those who are arrested crossing the border illegally. Even so, if a mere fraction of these illegal aliens vote, their ballots may make a key difference in a close election. Joe Biden’s margin of victory over Donald Trump in the 2020 election came down to less than 50,000 votes in three key states—Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin—in an election when more than 155 million Americans cast ballots. Although most Americans in the poll expressed concern about illegal aliens being allowed to vote, a majority expressed confidence that the proper winner will be decided in the 2024 election. Most respondents (67%) said they were “somewhat confident” (31%) or “very confident” (36%) that “the votes will be accurately counted and the proper winners declared.” About a third (31%) said they were “not very confident” (19%) or “not at all confident” (12%) about this. Self-identified Democrats (86%) expressed more faith in election administration than Republicans (51%) and independents (53%). Republicans and Democrats pointed to opposite concerns when it comes to honest elections. Pollsters asked, “Which is the bigger problem with election fraud, too many non-voters are allowed to vote, or too many legitimate voters are prevented from voting?” More Americans (45%) identified illegal voting as the problem, while a large minority (36%) said disenfranchisement of legal voters was the bigger issue. Most self-identified Republicans (71%) identified illegal voting as the key issue, while some (19%) pointed to disenfranchisement. More than half of Democrats (56%) said disenfranchisement is the main issue, while about a fifth (21%) of them pointed to illegal voting. Independents (46%) pointed to illegal voting, although some (21%) also pointed to disenfranchisement. Leftists deride measures such as those requiring identification to vote as “voter suppression,” claiming that some voters are unable to present ID. Most of the poll’s respondents (87%) said they favor requiring ID to vote, with 63% saying they “strongly favor” it. Majorities of self-identified Republicans (94%), Democrats (81%), and independents (81%) said they favor voter ID, although Democrats proved more likely to “somewhat favor” it (30%) than other groups (19% of Republicans and 14% of independents). RMG Research surveyed 1,000 registered voters between Wednesday and Thursday of last week; the poll’s margin of error is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points. The post ‘Large Number’ of Illegal Aliens Will Vote in 2024 Elections, Most Americans Say appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Colorado’s new LGBTQ social studies standards, which include first grade lessons on LGBTQ history, transgenderism, and the rainbow flag, is age-inappropriate and pushes a radical agenda, some parents in the state complain. “I don’t want my first grader learning anything about LGBTQ issues at all in school,” a Colorado father of a first grader who asked to remain anonymous told The Daily Signal. “If there was no agenda, then it wouldn’t be taught. For the schools or the district to have an agenda is the same to me as indoctrination.” The Colorado State Board of Education approved the new social studies standards in November 2022 to take effect in fall 2024. The standards incorporate the “historical and civic contributions of LGBTQ+” in first through 12th grade history and civics curriculum. The Colorado Department of Education did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment. In first grade civics, the education department recommends children read  “Sylvia and Marsha Start a Revolution,” the story of two black transgender “women” who “helped kickstart the Stonewall Riots” and “dedicated their lives to fighting for LGBTQ+ equality,” according to the description of it on Amazon. The Colorado Board of Education recommends first graders read this book about two transgender black “women.” (Amazon) Other in-class reading includes “The Story of Pete Buttigieg – Mayor Pete,” a children’s biography of the first openly gay presidential candidate, now the federal secretary of transportation, and an article about the current governor of Colorado, Jared Polis, who is gay. “Indoctrination to me means that the schools feel there is a necessity to override parenting, given there’s inherently going to be some inconsistencies with many families’ parenting and instruction to their children, and any school’s social agenda of this sort,” the first grader’s dad said. Colorado state Rep. Brandi Bradley opposes the standards because they teach children a “false narrative” and lead them down a path “to lifelong sterility and mutilation,” she said, referencing transgenderism. “This is child abuse, plain and simple,” Bradley, a public school mom, told The Daily Signal. “It’s pedophilia. It’s sexual perversion.” LGBTQ+ Annotated Resource SetsDownload In history class, first graders will “discuss common and unique characteristics of different cultures, including African American, Latino, Asian American, Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders, Indigenous Peoples, LGBTQ, and religious minorities, using multiple sources of information.” In lessons on the Pride flag, 6-year-olds read “Pride: The Story of Harvey Milk and the Rainbow Flag” and learn about the 2012 Gay Pride Parade in San Francisco, according to the Colorado Board of Education. Milk, who was gay, was a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. “The Pride Flag is an international symbol that represents the culture and people of the LGBTQ+ community,” the standards read. “The book introduces children to the Pride flag and its use in the San Francisco movements for gay rights. The first image comes from San Francisco’s modern LGBTQ+ celebrations around Gay Pride.” The rainbow flag is a “symbol of equality for citizens,” according to the standards. “The Pride Flag and its use in clothes, stickers, and other representations are a common and easily identifiable symbol for a community who has struggled to be seen,” the guide for first grade teachers continues. “By displaying the symbol, LGBTQ+ people can feel included and respected.” The Colorado Department of Education’s “Annotated Resource Set #1: 1st Grade History” contains LGBTQ resource recommendations. (Colorado Department of Education) First graders who can “discuss, identify, and explain important LGBTQ+ symbols” will be considered “prepared graduates” under the newly implemented standards. “There should be 100% agreement that kids of that age can’t think through these issues by themselves or even have a frame of reference for the issue, which makes the age too young to present the material,” according to the father of the first grader. “Therefore, when the school constructs the frame of reference for the kids and then presents the material, it’s pure indoctrination,” he said. Second graders read “When You Look Out the Window,” which focuses on a lesbian couple who move to San Francisco, and study rainbow crosswalks in Denver, which the standards say “visually demonstrate this diverse neighborhood’s connection and support of the LGBTQ+ community.” Recommended reading includes “If You’re a Kid Like Gavin: The True Story of a Young Trans Activist,” a children’s story about a biological female who lobbied to use the boys bathroom to match her “gender identity.” “Gavin chose to correct others when they got his pronouns wrong,” the Amazon description reads. “He asked to be respected. He stood up for himself. Gavin proved that his school had violated his constitutional rights and had the Supreme Court uphold his case—bringing about a historic win for trans rights. There are many kids out there, some just like Gavin Grimm, and they might even be you.” Fourth graders read “Donovan’s Big Day,” the story of a lesbian marriage from the perspective of a little boy. Fifth graders learn an answer to the question of “what barriers to citizenship have affected people including African Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans, Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders, Indigenous Peoples, LGBTQ, and religious minorities?” In sixth grade, the standards feature lessons on LGBTQ Native Americans. They learn to answer: “What values do different indigenous cultures have around gender and LGBTQ people?” Sixth graders learn about the term “two spirit” though a video explaining that it refers to Native American people “believed to be blessed with both male and female spirits.” Any lessons on LGBTQ history should be delivered objectively and should be optional, a Colorado mom of a preschooler and of a sixth grader told The Daily Signal. “Ultimately, this feels like another attempt by the government [and] schools to make values-based decisions for families as this gender-ideology issue persists,” the mother of two said, “and they are coming after younger and younger students in their attempts to normalize the issue and force widespread acceptance.” The post ‘Indoctrination’: Colorado Parents Outraged by Elementary School LGBTQ History Standards Launching This Fall appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The Secret Service has a “culture of deception,” former Rep. Jason Chaffetz says. “What they tell the public has routinely been inaccurate, if not an outright lie,” said Chaffetz, a Republican who represented Utah’s 3rd Congressional District and who is now a visiting fellow with The Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project. The former congressman made his remarks in a panel discussion, “The U.S. Secret Service Before, During, and After the Assassination Attempt of President Trump,” at The Heritage Foundation on Monday in Washington, D.C. He said the would-be assassin’s bullet that grazed former President Donald Trump on July 13 came close to changing the trajectory of our country. “It really highlighted for us that there is a serious problem that Secret Service’s got a reputation of being impenetrable, the premier law enforcement agency out there,” said Chaffetz, a regular contributor on the Fox News Channel. He expects an investigation into the Secret Service will assign the agency an “F” in five categories—recruiting, training, workload, communication, and technology. The Secret Service is understaffed, forcing too many people to work overtime, according to Chaffetz. Increased training is one of the key changes needed to Secret Service operations, said Tristan Leavitt, president of Empower Oversight, who also spoke on The Heritage Foundation panel. “And so, these individuals who go there because they have a passion. They want to be able to serve our nation. They’re not pursuing the training,” Leavitt said. The Secret Service needs to move to a threat-based protective model, he said, adding that threats against Trump are high, but he’s treated as a third-rate protective responsibility. The agency also need to increase respect for employees so people don’t leave, Leavitt said. “They leave, and the Secret Service then is always having to retrain individuals,” he said, adding that its protectees should feel confident in the Secret Service, regardless of their political party. “We need to fix the Secret Service,” Leavitt said. “You have to make changes so that everyone can have that confidence.” Americans have no reason to trust Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas’ ability to execute change in the Secret Service, said Susan Crabtree, Real Clear Politics national political correspondent, who has written extensively on the agency and its culture in the wake of the Trump shooting. “This new leadership needs to happen, and we can talk about exactly who we think is best for that,” Crabtree said. The post Secret Service Has ‘Routinely’ Misled American Public, Ex-Congressman Says appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The arrest of Telegram CEO Pavel Durov was initiated under the auspices of the Tribunal Judiciaire de Paris, which issued a statement detailing the circumstances surrounding Durov’s detention. “Pavel DUROV, founder and CEO of instant messaging and platform Telegram, was arrested… then taken into police custody at 8 p.m.,” the tribunal stated. This action is part of a “judicial investigation opened the 8th of July 2024, following a preliminary inquiry initiated by Section J3 – JUNALCO (Fight against Cybercrime) of the Paris Public Prosecutor’s Office.” The charges against Durov raise serious concerns about the potential for widespread legal actions against tech executives based on the content hosted on their platforms. The case also underscores the growing tension between government regulations and the principle of encryption, hinting at a possible future where strong encryption could face legal challenges. For example, the EU has already been using the idea of protecting children as the reason to call for a ban on all private messaging and the introduction of online digital ID. Durov is accused under several charges that encompass a wide array of alleged complicit behaviors. We obtained a copy of the full charges for you here. Complicity in Web-Mastering for Illegal Transactions: This charge alleges that Durov enabled illegal transactions by merely providing the digital infrastructure of Telegram. This sets a concerning precedent, suggesting that tech platforms might be held liable for any illegal activities conducted by their users, regardless of the platform’s direct involvement or knowledge. Refusal to Communicate Information for Lawful Interceptions: Durov is also charged with refusing to provide user data for government surveillance, highlighting a clash between government demands for data access and the commitment of tech companies to protect user privacy. Complicity in Narcotics and Child Abuse Activities: This involves accusations that Telegram was used to facilitate child abuse and drug trafficking, potentially making Durov liable for users’ actions involving narcotics, despite his non-involvement in those activities directly. Offering Tools for Cybersecurity Breaches: One charge accuses him of offering, selling, or making available tools that could be used to access or damage data systems, putting at risk the distribution of dual-use tools that are crucial for cybersecurity. Organized Fraud and Criminal Association: These charges suggest that Durov’s platform was used for organized fraud and other criminal activities, potentially holding him responsible for any criminal plans discussed or conducted via Telegram. Financial Crimes: Including charges such as laundering the proceeds derived from organized crime, which implicates the platform in financial misdeeds conducted through its services. Regulatory Non-Compliance in Cryptology: Durov faces several charges related to the provision of cryptography services without proper declarations, suggesting a legal push against strong encryption practices and private communication. Setting a Dangerous Precedent The nature of these charges suggests a shift in how legal responsibilities are assigned in the tech sector. Traditionally, tech companies in the US have operated under the legal framework that shields them from liability for user-generated content, thanks to regulations like Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act in the United States. Although there are some exceptions, Section 230 effectively absolves social media platforms of the responsibility for the wrongful acts or criminal behavior of their users. However, this is unique to the United States and is designed to allow innovation. In a global setting, the charges against Durov could indicate a move towards holding tech executives personally accountable for the activities that take place on their platforms, even if they are not directly involved in those activities. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post The Charges Against Telegram CEO Pavel Durov appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

Catholic Pregnancy Center Vandalized as DNC Ends

NYC's Sanctuary City Policies Likely Prevented ICE from Picking Up Accused Rapist

MRC founder and president Brent Bozell appeared on Fox's Life, Liberty & Levin on Sunday night to talk about Democrat convention coverage and share the latest Media Research Center poll about how little Biden voters know about the real campaign planks of Kamala Harris in the last presidential primary race.  Levin began: "Four full days of coverage of this Potemkin convention. I didn’t learn a damn thing about a damn thing. We had the media telling us what to think. The media telling us it’s joyful and the vibes are great. We have Jon Karl telling George Stephanopoulos that Kamala Harris reminds her of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. Are these guys smoking something?" Bozell underlined that the poll shows what she favored (and now won't talk about): 71 percent of Democrats didn’t know that she supported reparations for slavery; 86 percent didn’t know that she supports giving death row inmates the right to vote; 73 percent of Democrats didn’t know that she was a co-sponsor of the radical Green New Deal, 81 percent of Democrats didn’t know she favored abolishing private health insurance. BOZELL The border is the number two issue facing Americans — Democrats, Republicans alike are looking at the border being overrun and they’re horrified by what’s happening. With that in mind, 72 percent of Democrats didn’t know that as border czar, she had never once been to a conflict zone, and they’re actually pretending that she was never the border czar; 77 percent of Democrats didn’t know that she supports eliminating ICE, but here’s the big one, Mark, the one that jumped off the page to me, 74 percent of Democrats do not know that she is in favor of not making it a crime to cross the border illegally. Levin asked about the media's parlous performance, and Bozell argued  BOZELL: If I were a political reporter and the old fashioned Bob Novak kind of political, this election cycle would be the most intriguing election of my lifetime. In the middle of the campaign, the Democratic nominee, the presumptive nominee, who also happens to be the president of the United States is thrown under the bus by the Democratic political machine. I mean, what a story to investigate and yet silence. Kamala Harris, who was considered the whole time she was vice president, an absolutely inept vice president, everybody did, suddenly, suddenly, overnight, literally overnight, the entire Democratic machine declares she is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Both men agreed we have a corrupt one-party press, and that criticizing it isn't whining. Levin said "confronting a corrupt state-run media, whether in the United States or Russia or China or Cuba or Venezuela or Iran is not whining. That’s your civic duty. That’s your patriotic duty." Bozell laid out a real-life scenario with NBC reporter Tom Llamas on the floor in Chicago: "If I were someone in the Democratic machine with the convention, I would want a reporter to go up to Chuck Schumer and ask him about the electricity in the room and ask him: “Talk to me about the atmosphere in here. Is it electric?” And then I would want that exact same reporter, three minutes later on air to say Senator Schumer wasn’t lying when he said, there’s lots of electricity, excitement right now." Transcript below:  FNC's Life, Liberty & Levin August 25, 2024 LEVIN: Hello, America. I’m here with our friend, Brent Bozell, Media Research Center, founder and president. Brent Bozell, four full days of coverage of this Potemkin convention. I didn’t learn a damn thing about a damn thing. We had the media telling us what to think. The media telling us it’s joyful and the vibes are great. We have Jon Karl telling George Stephanopoulos that Kamala Harris reminds her of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. Are these guys smoking something? Did we learn something from this convention? BRENT BOZELL: No, no, and I’ll give you some numbers, which startled me. We took a survey of Democratic voters leading into the elections to see what they knew about Kamala Harris. Mark, the numbers are not to be believed, 71 percent of Democrats didn’t know that she supported reparations to atone for slavery; 86 percent didn’t know that she supports giving death row inmates the right to vote; 73 percent of Democrats didn’t know that she was a co-sponsor of the radical Green New Deal, 81 percent of Democrats didn’t know health insurance is one of the most important issues out there, that she’s in favor of eliminating all private health insurance. You heard me right, 71 percent of Democrats didn’t know that she was in favor of defunding the police, 78 percent of Democrats didn’t know that she set up the fund to bail out protesters during the 2020 riots. The border is the number two issue facing Americans — Democrats, Republicans alike are looking at the border being overrun and they’re horrified by what’s happening. With that in mind, 72 percent of Democrats didn’t know that as border czar, she had never once been to a conflict zone, and they’re actually pretending that she was never the border czar; 77 percent of Democrats didn’t know that she supports eliminating ICE, but here’s the big one, Mark, the one that jumped off the page to me, 74 percent of Democrats do not know that she is in favor of not making it a crime to cross the border illegally. In other words, complete open borders, anybody can come in, and it’s not a crime to do that, 74 percent so that was leading into the convention, I can guarantee you, Mark Levin, leaving the convention, nothing has changed because they never addressed any one of these issues. Had they made their case to the American people on all of these things, saying, I believe these things, I believe that death row inmates ought to get the right to vote, I believe we need to eliminate the police, I believe we need to have open borders, I believe we need to take away your private health insurance. Had she made that argument, Donald Trump would be ahead by 30 points right now. LEVIN: You’re a hundred percent right. So let’s dig into this a little bit, because we had four days of wall-to-wall coverage and convention, we learned absolutely nothing. It’s all so weird, the media are so weird. The people they interview are so weird. It’s just the whole damn thing is like — it’s just strange. We’re supposed to be in the greatest democracy on the face of the Earth. We’re supposed to have the greatest free press on the face of the Earth, and we have a candidate for president of the United States, who is the vice president the United States, the American people do not know, and by God, if she has her way, her party has her way, and the media have her way, the American people will never know about her right up to and including on election day and I see liberals and Democrats on this network and other networks say, but it’s working. What’s working? It’s not working for the American people. What do you see? BOZELL: Well, it’s working because those same Democrats in the media are enabling it for it to happen. Look, Mark, you know, I would think, if I were a political reporter and the old fashioned Bob Novak kind of political, this election cycle would be the most intriguing election of my lifetime. In the middle of the campaign, the Democratic nominee, the presumptive nominee, who also happens to be the president of the United States is thrown under the bus by the Democratic political machine. I mean, what a story to investigate and yet silence. Kamala Harris, who was considered the whole time she was vice president, an absolutely inept vice president, everybody did, suddenly, suddenly, overnight, literally overnight, the entire Democratic machine declares she is the greatest thing since sliced bread. This is a great story for the media just to investigate. And yet, and yet, and yet, they have been the ones who have put the kibosh. All of this talk about Kamal Harris won’t do an interview. What about reporters doing a story? This is being lost. Reporters are deliberately keeping the kibosh on her record. They don’t want the American people to know who she is. LEVIN: Yes, and that’s what happens in authoritarian regimes, not great Constitutional Republics. So what is this? Is it an authoritarian regime? Or is it a great constitutional republic? We’ll explore that when we return. We’ll be right back. ... LEVIN: Welcome back. Brent Bozell, I love the way the Democrats talk about democracy, free speech, when, of course, they reject democracy and free speech. This is the most authoritarian regime in Washington, DC we’ve ever seen, and they have their state-run media, compliant black dog media with them, because so many Democrats populate so many of these newsrooms and these platforms. So they’ve come together. They did it with Biden. Now they’re doing it with her. But I listen to you on the polling numbers, I see a downside and an upside. You see a downside and an upside too? BOZELL: Yes, look, the downside is the strategy is working, and it’s working beyond their wildest dreams. America believes — the Democratic Party believes that Kamala Harris is a moderate. Rachel Maddow, her read on the speech was and I am making this up, “You will remember where you were when you heard the speech on this night. This is an inflection point in history.” That’s how they presented this. a Reagan-esque Maggie Thatcher-esque. It is working when you see that the Democrats don’t know anything about her radical record, and the fact that she, along with her vice presidential candidate, is the most radical person ever to run for the presidency of the United States. The bad news for the Trump campaign is that this is working to perfection. The very good news for the Trump campaign is he can drive a truck right through this, if he focuses on these issues. Look, Mark, if I were — if this were Donald Trump speaking right now, I would give a speech, and I would say, my opponent believes that we need to pay reparations for slavery. My opponent believes that death row inmates need to have the right to vote. My opponent co-sponsored the radical Green New Deal. My opponent wants to eliminate your private health care. My opponent supports defunding the police. My opponent supports putting together bail funds to bail out radical protesters. My opponent, as borders czar never went to a conflict zone. My opponent believes in abolishing ICE, and my opponent believes it shouldn’t be a crime to enter this country illegally. If you support that, please vote for my opponent. If you don’t support that, if you love America, vote for me. Boom and then I would say, and I’m going to go play golf in Scotland. I’ll be back on election day. You all talk among yourselves and let me know — and that’s the speech I will make. LEVIN: Well, yes, and I’d add to it. My opponent takes Hamas statistics and use them against the state of Israel. My opponent does not believe in free speech. My opponent believes in destroying the independence of the Supreme Court. My opponent believes in destroying our voting system and eliminating the electoral college. And you can go on and on and on, and I think President Trump has been doing more and more of that. The problem is, people say, why do you keep whining about the media? First of all, confronting a corrupt state-run media, whether in the United States or Russia or China or Cuba or Venezuela or Iran is not whining. That’s your civic duty. That’s your patriotic duty. We don’t have a free press in this country, as you have demonstrated over and over and over again. We have a party press. We have a press that defends centralized authoritarian government. This election, Brent Bozell, tell me if you agree or disagree, is about them, too. How many more election cycles are we going to allow them to interfere in the election so the American people are not aware of the candidate that the Democrats run? Whether he is mentally disabled or whether the candidate is as dumb as a doorknob. BOZELL: The public needs to understand there is no daylight whatsoever between the media — the news media, and the Democratic Party. No daylight. If I was Hillary Clinton’s press secretary and I wanted to put out a statement about how good Hillary Clinton’s speech would be, I would say the feeling here is, when Hillary Clinton spoke, it was as if somebody had plugged in a cable, a current had connected, and there was pure electricity in the room. Well, that was actually a report from a CBS reporter. If I were someone in the Democratic machine with the convention, I would want a reporter to go up to Chuck Schumer and ask him about the electricity in the room and ask him: “Talk to me about the atmosphere in here. Is it electric?” And then I would want that exact same reporter, three minutes later on air to say Senator Schumer wasn’t lying when he said, there’s lots of electricity, excitement right now. If I were somebody in the convention, I would want somebody to say the bench right now, the Democratic bench right now, is as electric. Notice how they’re all using the same word — is as electric as I’ve ever seen in the Democratic Party. That’s what I would want. These were all — that was Rachel Maddow. The reporters are giving the talking points for the Democratic Party. The public must understand this. You’re not getting news anymore. What you’re getting is the talking points of a radicalized Democratic Party. Full stop. There’s no other discussion. LEVIN: You’re a hundred percent right. Brent Bozell, thank you, my friend, and keep up the great work. BOZELL: Thank you. Thanks for what you’re doing, Mark.

Monday marked three years since the deadly Islamic terror attack in Kabul, Afghanistan at Hamid Karzai International Airport that murdered 13 American soldiers, 170 Afghans, and left over 150 people wounded. Instead of even briefly acknowledging this painful day for American families in what became the symbol of the Biden-Harris’s administration’s withdrawal from Afghanistan, ABC, CBS, and NBC completely ignored it on their flagship morning news shows. To repeat: not a word from ABC’s Good Morning America, CBS Mornings, and NBC’s Today about the sacrifice of the brave Americans standing guard at Abbey Gate. The networks shamefully adopted the mold of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris in being radio silent (aside from paper statements released from their handlers). In contrast, cable news shows that aired during that same block — Fox Business Network’s Mornings with Maria, Fox News Channel’s Fox & Friends, Newsmax’s Wake Up America, NewsNation’s Morning in America, and even CNN News Central — all mentioned it multiple times. Former President Trump spent much of Monday in somber remembrance. Trump began his day at Arlington National Cemetery for a wreath-laying ceremony with Americans directly impacted by that horrible day, walked the grounds of the cemetery to the grave sites of those buried there. Hours later, he traveled to Michigan for the National Guard Association convention for a speech touching on the events August 26, 2021. Elsewhere, our friend Matthew Foldi has details on the anniversary in his excellent newsletter, the Washington Reporter, including continued concerns about evacuation protocols at the State Department and Speaker Michael Johnson (R-LA) announcing he’ll award the Congressional Cold Medal posthumously to the 13 servicemembers. Over at the Washington Examiner, their former Justice reporter and former House Foreign Affairs Committee staffer Jerry Dunleavy penned a meticulous and first-person expose as an ex-staffer on the Republican-led panel detailing what he believes has been a catastrophic failure to hold the administration and Pentagon to account. Last week, the Free Beacon’s Adam Kredo obtained a transcript of former White House Press Secretary and MSNBC host Jen Psaki’s interview with the committee in which she admitted she never “challenge[d] or question[ed]” contradictory information about the chaos. The networks had other ideas about what would be a better use of their time instead of honoring those brave Americans. ABC’s Good Morning America used its “Cover Story’ segment in the second hour for two minutes and 42 seconds warning against designer “dupes” with consumers buying products that look similar to designer brands, but fail to hold durability. On CBS Mornings, they spent over five minutes (5:19) fixating on the new paperback version of Michael Lewis’s book sucking up to disgraced cryptocurrency mogul and liberal donor Sam Bankman-Fried. NBC’s Today was even worse. In the first hour, they had two minutes and 17 seconds on Princess Kate venturing out in public for church amid her cancer battle and then three minutes and 25 seconds on members of the Los Angeles Chargers having to spend hours trapped in a hotel elevator. A day earlier, CBS News Sunday Morning had a profile of one family with loved ones still behind in Afghanistan with the women no longer able to continue their educations because of the Taliban. Left out of segment? Any mention of Joe Biden. In the following our, CBS’s Face the Nation host Margaret Brennan pressed Democratic Congressman Pat Ryan (NY) on Harris’s role in the withdrawal as he cited Afghanistan in his call for Biden to quit the 2024 race. This year’s silence on August 26 mirrored that of 2023, when ABC’s World News Tonight was the only newscast to mention it. In 2022, none of the morning shows marked the occasion with NBC Nightly News being the only network evening newscast to break through