CHICAGO—As delegates and the media descend on the Windy City for the Democratic National Convention, Kamala Harris not only has to energize the base; she also has to convince the rest of America that she can mend a moribund economy and keep order as parts of the country seem hell-bent on chaos. That is, Harris has to convince voters she can do better than her boss, Joe Biden, has done. That’s a tall order for a vice president who has been as unavailable in 2024 as Biden was during the 2020 campaign. At least Biden had COVID-19 as an excuse for working from his basement. I have sympathy. Probably the most important thing a vice president can do is not upstage the president. Considering how low-energy Biden has been in his term of office, Harris had to make sure that she didn’t look as if she was trying to elbow the old man off the path. As a woman who didn’t have decades of Washington experience—she was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2016—she didn’t move into the veep’s residence at the U.S. Naval Observatory and enter the office with a weighty portfolio on foreign affairs that she could use to establish her national security chops.  Then came the Biden-Trump debate. Followed by Biden’s announcement that he would not run for reelection. And suddenly Harris is supposed to be someone else. She’s supposed to go from wallflower to firebrand—and convince Americans that she should be in charge after she spent three years being barely visible. So a month after it became clear she would head the Democratic ticket, Harris still has not given a real press interview. (That didn’t stop Time magazine from putting her on the cover, but that’s another issue.) If the economy were better, Harris could concentrate on abortion and “social justice” issues. But Americans are anxious about their own and their children’s future. So, Team Kamala is talking up “an opportunity economy.” The campaign released a plan to make housing more affordable—by promising first-time homebuyers $25,000 to purchase a starter home. (If you saw how student loans drove up college tuition, you can guess what this scheme could do to the real estate market.) Don’t get me started on what she’d do to grocery prices. No wonder Harris is not talking to the press. Even The Washington Post editorialized that her economic package “squandered the moment on populist gimmicks.” You see in this campaign the desire to placate rather than dazzle. Hence the pick for Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as running mate. He’s so nonthreatening. Back to the housing scheme, the problem is, Harris is not known as an economic thought leader. She’s a lawyer. Her passion belongs to social issues and abortion politics. Maybe it all changes this week and Harris knocks it out of the park with an impassioned argument for the leftist causes she holds dear. But Harris has a problem. She’s from California. She doesn’t really know how to argue with conservatives. She’s never really had to. So what I’m seeing is a campaign that has two messages: First, Harris is not Donald Trump. Second, Harris is not Biden—or is she? COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Kamala Harris Is No Joe Biden. Or Is She? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL: Representative Chip Roy, chairman of the subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government, is calling on FBI Director Christopher Wray to explain discrepancies between his testimony to Congress and Justice Department prosecution data. Wray testified to Congress on July 24 that the FBI has focused more attention on pro-abortion violence against pro-life facilities since the overturn of Roe v. Wade. “Since the Dobbs decision,” he said, “actually more of our abortion-related violent extremism investigations have focused on violence against pro-life facilities as opposed to the other way around.” Roy, a Texas Republican, reminded Wray in a Monday letter that since January 2021, the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division has charged 24 Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act cases against 55 defendants, according to DOJ data first reported by The Daily Caller. In the letter, first obtained by The Daily Signal, Roy emphasized that only two of those 24 cases originated from attacks on pregnancy resource centers. And those two cases involved only 5 defendants. “This data is particularly troubling in light of the fact that there have been at least 90 individual cases of attacks on pro-life organizations and pregnancy resource centers since the May 2022 leak of the Supreme Court’s draft opinion for the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case,” he wrote. President Bill Clinton signed the FACE Act into law in 1994. While FACE protects both abortion clinics and pregnancy resource centers, President Joe Biden’s DOJ has heavily enforced the law against pro-lifers since the June 2022 overturning of Roe v. Wade. 2024-08-19 Roy to Wray re FACE Act testimonyDownload “The fact that the Department’s own data shows that a mere 8 percent of FACE Act cases filed by the Biden-Harris administration are against agitators at pregnancy resource centers would seem to belie your assertion that a majority of ‘abortion-related violent extremism investigations have focused on violence against pro-life facilities’ following the Dobbs decision,” the congressman added. Roy’s letter calls for Wray and the FBI to provide documents “sufficient to substantiate” his assertion that the FBI has undertaken more pro-abortion violent extremism incidents than otherwise since May 2, 2022. Kristen Clarke, the head of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, heads up enforcement of the FACE Act. Following a report from The Daily Signal, Clarke recently admitted that she hid an arrest and its subsequent expungement from investigators when she was confirmed to her Justice Department post. The president’s critics have accused the Biden/Harris administration and the DOJ of weaponizing the FACE Act against pro-lifers while failing to charge pro-abortion criminals for the hundreds of attacks on pregnancy resource centers since the May 2022 leak of the draft Supreme Court opinion indicating Roe would soon be overturned. Some, among them Roy and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, have called for the repeal of the FACE Act, arguing that it serves no purpose but to target pro-life activists. “The Biden administration is using the FACE Act to give pro-life activists and senior citizens lengthy prison terms for nonviolent offenses and protests—all while turning a blind eye to the violence, arson, and riots conducted on behalf of ‘approved’ leftist causes,” Lee told The Daily Signal in May, when a number of pro-life activists were sentenced to prison time. “Unequal enforcement of the law is a violation of the law,” Lee added at the time, “and men and women who try to expose the horrors of abortion are being unjustly persecuted for their motivations.” The FBI did not respond to requests for comment for this story. The post EXCLUSIVE: Congressman Calls FBI Director’s Bluff, Demands Evidence of Investigations Into Pro-Abortion Violence appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Editor’s Note: Protests are building at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago. In May, The Daily Signal’s Jarrett Stepman wrote a short history of the 1968 DNC where—just like today—a Democrat incumbent president stepped down for a vice president. The party was deeply divided over the Vietnam War and today is divided about the war in Gaza. Vice President Kamala Harris is running on the “politics of joy.” Hubert Humphrey also ran with the slogan “The Politics of Joy” in 1968. Back then, riots by leftwing activists in Chicago disrupted that message of joy and unity. Are we seeing a repeat this week? The following is Stepman’s write-up, originally published on May 19. Will we see a repeat this summer of the infamous 1968 Chicago Democratic National Convention that devolved into chaos and anarchy? This year’s convention is, like 1968, set to take place in Chicago and social unrest is percolating on the Left, to say the least. In a recent interview on Fox News, Rep. Dean Phillips, D-Minn.—who challenged President Joe Biden in the Democratic Party presidential primary—said that given our current course of events, history is likely to repeat itself. “I’m afraid this is looking awfully like 1968 with a lot of anger and angst and disenfranchisement that I think are going to play out on TV this summer, and it’s going to be awfully contentious,” Phillips said on Wednesday. In 1968, anti-Vietnam War and various other far-left protesters descended on the Windy City to protest the party’s presidential nominating convention. Illinois delegates hold a banner touting Chicago Mayor Richard Daley on the convention floor on Aug. 29, 1968, the final day of the 1968 Democratic National Convention, held at the International Amphitheatre in Chicago. (Photo: Pictorial Parade/Archive Photos/Getty Images) The situation escalated when then-Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, a Democrat, had enough and unleashed the Chicago Police Department on the protesters. The media at the time strongly criticized the Chicago Police Department, but many Americans strongly sympathized with the authorities, who desperately sought to restore order. The events of the convention likely swayed a lot of voters concerned about violent radicals taking over their cities. Many in the media sided with the protesters, while the American people largely sided with the police. Democratic Party delegates hold placards at the 1968 Democratic National Convention, held at the International Amphitheatre in Chicago in August of that year. (Photo: Archive Photos/Getty Images) The chaos was likely one of the reasons Republican Richard Nixon defeated Democrat Hubert Humphrey in November 1968. Preelection chaos created by the Left led to the “silent majority” delivering Nixon a resounding victory. Given the protests we’ve seen across the country in recent months and the pressure the Left is putting on Democrats over Israel’s war in Gaza, it’s hard not to think that this year’s Democratic convention could see similar protests. Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson has said that safety is a “top priority” for the convention, but he’s hardly the law-and-order mayor that Daley was. In fact, Johnson has supported defunding the police, has openly sympathized with the anti-Israel protesters, and even made it clear that he’s nothing like Daley. As my colleague Tony Kinnett noted, Johnson has said he’s a different kind of Democrat. In a certain sense, Johnson’s attitude is a sign that in the long-term, the New Left factions that protested in Chicago in 1968 “won.” (More on that later.) While prominent Democrats and members of the media insist that 2024 won’t be like 1968, it’s difficult not to see that a storm is potentially brewing. There have already been significant protests at Chicago universities, pro-Palestine groups have sprung up around the city (some spouting chants like “Death to America!”), and a large group of anti-Israel protesters raised a Palestinian flag near where the Democratic convention is set to take place Aug. 19-22.  There’s no question that Democrats are already getting nervous about what might happen. The 1968 convention was a seminal moment in both the history of the Democratic Party and the United States. It signaled a long-term takeover of the party and various other institutions by the New Left.  Given that the comparisons will continue to be made, it’s worth looking back at what happened 56 years ago. New Left Organizes to Sow Chaos In 1968, President Lyndon Johnson had elected not to seek a second term despite winning a landslide in 1964. Even though the Vietnam War had been conducted by Democratic presidents, the party had turned in an antiwar direction. This became a flashpoint for a party that had become increasingly divided. The common narrative of the Chicago Democratic National Convention in the years that followed was that it was a “mostly peaceful” protest of the Vietnam War, broken up by a brutish and out-of-control Chicago police force. That’s not exactly accurate. The reality is that the well-organized protesters were looking to pick a fight to bolster their cause, as historian Stephen F. Hayward described in his book, “The Age of Reagan: The Fall of the Old Liberal Order, 1964-1980.” “The Chicago police reacted to a calculated provocation,” Hayward wrote. “And, like the case of fighting schoolchildren, where the second child to strike a blow is the one usually caught by the teacher, the media caught the police reaction and attributed it as the cause of the violence.” Hayward explained how plans to disrupt the convention began as early as December 1967 and were the product of three main groups. Those groups were the Youth International Party, or the “Yippies”; the National Mobilization to End the War in Vietnam, or “Mobe”; and the Students for a Democratic Society, the SDS. The factions had slightly different agendas for what they wanted to pull off in Chicago. The Mobe generally wanted a peaceful protest to take place, though it wasn’t exactly averse to causing mayhem—and potentially, violence. “It would be a mistake to think that the fight against the war can be won in the ballot box,” said Mobe leader David Dellinger. “It still has to be won on the streets.” The Yippies wanted something more like a giant street festival. They announced a plan to put LSD in the Chicago water supply. Chlorine treatment of the water would have neutralized any threat to the Chicago population, but the Chicago police took the threat seriously enough to put officers in front of the city’s filtration plants. The Students for a Democratic Society were looking for a fight. Hayward noted that the reasons the SDS was looking to ratchet up violence is that they saw liberal antiwar presidential candidates like Robert F. Kennedy and Eugene McCarthy as a threat. For leaders of this movement and others on the far Left, the entire American system needed to be overthrown. They weren’t looking for peace in Vietnam; they were looking to overturn the American way of life and government. While the three factions plotted different tactics to achieve their goals, they were nevertheless united behind a larger agenda. They wanted to sow chaos as much as possible so that they could eventually shove their more moderate cohorts on the Left aside and take the reins of power. They wanted to agitate, disrupt, and put the most pressure possible on Democrats to bend to their will. Humphrey frequently mentioned on the campaign trail that he wanted to bring the “politics of joy” to the country. The activists were having none of it. “We are coming to Chicago to vomit on the ‘politics of joy,’” SDS leader Tom Hayden wrote before the convention, “to expose the secret decisions, upset the nightclub orgies, and face the Democratic Party with its illegitimacy and criminality.” Days of Rage Given the other events of 1968, it isn’t hard to see why the Democratic convention became a mess in hindsight. Two riots had already taken place in Chicago earlier in the year. Civil rights leader the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. was fatally shot in April and Robert Kennedy was assassinated in June. Many college campuses had been in turmoil in the spring. Student protesters had practically shut down Columbia University and occupied Hamilton Hall before being cleared out by the New York Police Department in late April. Yes, I’m still talking about 1968 here, not 2024. By August, the mood was still deeply unsettled. The Democratic race came down to Vice President Hubert Humphrey and Sen. Edmund Muskie of Maine. While the party had conceded a great deal to the antiwar wing, it wasn’t nearly enough to appease the activists. There were late attempts to move the convention to Miami, but they didn’t come to fruition. Johnson, who remained a powerful influence in the party, was alleged to have said that “Miami is not an American city.” The show went on. The 1968 convention was set to take place for four days in Chicago’s International Amphitheater, starting on Aug. 26. Before the events kicked off, protesters began gathering in the city. Daley was hesitant to issue permits to the protesters, but consented to let them gather miles from the convention in Lincoln Park. He then changed his mind and ordered Chicago police to implement an 11 p.m. curfew. Again, while many of the about 12,000 protesters who showed up in the city likely wanted to conduct a peaceful protest, the organizers knew that it would be easy to manipulate the situation to initiate violence. More from Hayward: [H]ard-core leaders of the Left knew it would be easy to manipulate the situation into a violent confrontation with police—and be able to blame the police.  Chicago’s police were notoriously aggressive toward protesters and rioters. [Daley] had famously ordered his police to “shoot to kill” arsonists and looters during the riots that followed King’s assassination in April. (It should be noted, however, that no one was shot during the convention riots.) Once the protesters had been pushed out of Lincoln Park, all hell began to break loose as the protesters violently clashed with police, who used tear gas and billy clubs to disperse the crowd. It wasn’t just police clashing with the protesters. Daley brought thousands of National Guardsmen into the city, too, with the governor’s consent. Violence continued to ramp up around the city as the protesters continued to clash with police, and members of the media got caught up in the melee. Aug. 28 saw the most significant day of violence at the so-called “Battle of Michigan Avenue,” which was televised live. That night, Humphrey secured the nomination as police clashed with protesters who had attempted to march on the convention. Authorities put up barricades around the convention site and tightened up security even further for the final day of the convention, where protesters twice tried to get into the convention hall, but were rebuffed. Hundreds of protesters and police officers suffered injuries during the scrums and authorities arrested more than 650 people. Though many prominent Democrats blamed Daley for the violence that took place, Daley naturally disagreed. He argued that calling on the police and National Guard was necessary to suppress people who were intentionally creating violence and disorder.  Daley gave a speech addressing what had happened. “In the heat of emotion and riot, some policemen may have overreacted,” he said. “But to judge the entire police department by the alleged action of a few would be just as unfair as to judge our entire young generation by the action of this mob.” Daley further said that while he didn’t condone any violent actions, he also would not permit a “group of violent terrorists to menace the lives of millions of people, destroy the purpose of this national convention, or take over the streets of Chicago.” Chicago Mayor Richard Daley confers with President John F. Kennedy, a fellow Democrat, in the Oval Office of the White House on July 11, 1962. Daley was still mayor six years later during the 1968 Democratic National Convention. (Photo: Arnie Sachs/CNP/Getty Images) The Aftermath SDS leader Hayden said that the result of the Chicago protests was “100% victory in propaganda” and said he hoped that what happened in Chicago would be repeated around the country whenever Humphrey showed up at a campaign stop. From the perspective of the New Left activists, the chaos was seen as a victory. The fact that several prominent members of the media were injured in the events was a bonus that would lead to sympathy and positive coverage for their cause, or so they said. But attitudes around the country were hardly universal. Most Americans sided with Daley and the police over the activists, and many thought the police should have been even more proactive. “A poll taken shortly after the riots found that 71 percent of Americans thought Chicago’s security measures were justified; 57 percent thought the police had not used excessive force, while 25 percent thought the police had not used enough force,” Hayward wrote. In a sense, both the activists and their most stalwart opponents benefited politically from the Chicago convention. The moderate wing of the Democratic Party continued to lose power and influence. The party was forever changed by what had transpired, and popular narratives took hold that the activists were on the right side of history, while the authorities were simply reactionaries. On the flip side, a rising coalition on the Right—fed up with the urban chaos and intentional agitation—would deliver the White House in a landslide to Nixon. The post Is This Year’s Democratic Convention Going to Be a Repeat of 1968? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Sign Up To Keep Reading This post is for Reclaim The Net supporters. Gain access to the entire archive of features and supporters-only content. Help protect free speech, freedom from surveillance, and digital civil liberties. Join Already a supporter? Login here If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Ford’s Shocking New Idea Lets Cars Spy on Others and Send Data to Cops and Insurance Companies appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

Elon Musk’s X platform shut down its office in Brazil as the government attempted to coerce censorship. Brazil’s Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes and Musk had spent months battling over online free speech, with Musk refusing the justice’s aggressive and extensive censorship demands. On Saturday, X’s Global Government Affairs announced its decision to close the Brazil office due to De Moraes’s shocking threats to X staff over alleged “disinformation” on the platform. X is still available to Brazilians, however. “The decision to close the ? office in Brazil was difficult, but, if we had agreed to @alexandre’s (illegal) secret censorship and private information handover demands, there was no way we could explain our actions without being ashamed,” Musk commented on X. As shown in several MRC Free Speech America studies, X has suppressed some free speech, but not on the scale and harshness required by De Moraes. X’s Global Government Affairs added more details. “Last night, Alexandre de Moraes threatened our legal representative in Brazil with arrest if we do not comply with his censorship orders. He did so in a secret order, which we share here to expose his actions,” X Global Government Affairs stated in an X post. It continued that numerous appeals to the Supreme Court went unheard despite Brazilian staff having no responsibility or control over content moderation. Instead, Moraes chose to “threaten” X’s staff in Brazil “rather than respect the law or due process.” This, the Global Government Affairs X account lamented, led the platform to shut down the Brazilian operation “effective immediately.”  The X Global Government Affairs account added that the justice’s actions are “incompatible with democratic government,” and concluded that the people of Brazil “have a choice to make - democracy, or Alexandre de Moraes.” Musk had previously reposted an assertion that “? is the #1 news app in Brazil on the AppStore” and “Alexandre de Moraes is demanding censorship of the only source of truth in Brazil.” Related: UPDATE: Are You Paying Attention? Brazil Escalates Major Free Speech Assault Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment and provide an equal platform for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using MRC Free Speech America’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

A California man is refusing to take down his pro-Trump flag and decorations after his homeowners' association ordered him to take them down because they violate the HOA rules. Paul Wood Bonilla believes the HOA of his residence in Lodi is targeting him because the group's officials object to the political message. 'I believe in the American way, and I'm not going to be bullied.' "I knew that the minute that I started supporting Trump that they were going to give me a hard time," Bonilla said to KOVR-TV. Bonilla received a letter from the HOA saying that it restricts signage in excess of three square feet. The letter does not mention the politics of his signage. "The guy took a bullet for me," said Bonilla, referring to Trump. "I am going to support him." A local attorney told KOVR that the HOA is in the wrong and it would likely lose in court if challenged legally. "The HOA is completely wrong," said Michael Wise. "[It] cannot force him to take it down at all." Wise pointed to state law that allows signage up to nine square feet in size. "It doesn't threaten public safety or health, it doesn't violate state or federal law, it's on a permitted medium," Wise explained. Bonilla says he is not backing down from the HOA. "I am going to stand up for what I believe in. I believe in President Trump," Bonilla continued. "I believe in the American way, and I'm not going to be bullied." KOVR also spoke to one neighbor who objected to Bonilla's signs. "I think it's big. I think it's intrusive," said Jim Brent. "I don't think it has to do with the message. It has to do with the way he is expressing it." Bonilla says that other neighbors are supportive of his decorations and some are planning to put up their own signs to support him. KOVR said it was unable to obtain a comment from either the HOA or the management company. The outlet published its interview with Bonilla on its news video report at YouTube. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Washington, D.C., Councilmember Trayon White Sr. was recently arrested for allegedly facilitating a $156,000 bribery scheme. White, a Democrat, has been representing D.C.’s Ward 8 since 2017, and he recently won the Democratic primary in June.White is accused of using his position in office to pressure government employees to extend contracts in exchange for cash payments, the Department of Justice announced Monday.‘What you need me to do, man?’A criminal complaint revealed that White was charged with bribery for allegedly accepting money and other items of value in return for using his position to pressure employees at the Office of Neighborhood Safety and Engagement and the Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services to extend several contracts valued at $5.2 million.Since June, White has allegedly received four payments totaling $156,000 from the owner of two unnamed companies. According to the complaint, an arrangement between White and the contractor was caught on video. White allegedly accepted $35,000 from the company while it was “working covertly under the auspices of the FBI.”According to the affidavit, video footage captured White asking the contractor, “What you need me to do, man?”“I don’t wanna feel like you gotta gimme something to get something,” White continued before taking an envelope of money from the contractor, according to the filing. “We better than that.”The affidavit claimed that the contractor agreed to give White a 3% cut of the government contracts he helped to extend.A spokesperson for the D.C. city council told NBC News that White was arrested around 2 p.m. on Sunday. He was released from custody the following day after his court appearance. His next court date is slated for September 19. The spokesperson noted that the council was unaware of the investigation ahead of White’s arrest, the news outlet reported.U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia Matthew Graves stated, “Because the investigation into the alleged bribery scheme involved contracts that could soon be awarded and other potential official acts that could be taken, our Office took swift steps to address the alleged crimes we were investigating.”A spokesperson for White did not respond to a request for comment from NBC News. White’s attorney declined to comment, the Washington Post reported.Earlier this year, White’s campaign committees were hit with a $40,000 fine from the D.C. Office of Campaign Finance for allegedly failing to provide requested documents to rectify expenditure and contribution discrepancies. A spokesperson for White’s office stated that the councilman appealed the fines, the Post reported.White previously garnered national attention in 2018 when he was accused of spreading an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory when mentioning the Rothschilds in a video he posted on social media.In the video, White said, “Man, it just started snowing out of nowhere this morning, man. Y’all better pay attention to this climate control, man, this climate manipulation. And D.C. keep talking about, ‘We a resilient city.’ And that’s a model based off the Rothschilds controlling the climate to create natural disasters they can pay for to own the cities, man. Be careful.”Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A 55-year-old male is accused of grabbing a 15-year-old by the neck and throwing him to the floor of an In-and-Out Burger in Loveland, Colorado, earlier this month — and much of the incident was caught on video.Police said officers arrived at the In-and-Out at 1450 Fall River Drive at 1 a.m. Aug. 4 and spoke to a 15-year-old male who said he and two friends were inside the restaurant splashing water on each other when a woman was accidentally splashed.The suspect was facing charges of second-degree felony assault-strangulation and misdemeanor child abuse, police said.Police said "the juvenile male approached her table to apologize when an adult male accompanying the woman suddenly grabbed him, placed both hands around the front and back of his neck, pulled him down to the table and threw him backward onto the floor."The adult male then is heard telling the teen, "Apologize! You don't treat a lady that way! Say sorry."Police said the adult male and female left the restaurant before police arrived, and officers spent the next week interviewing witnesses and reviewing videos showing "different views of the incident." Police said witnesses came forward and identified the male suspect while officers confirmed the suspect’s identity after gathering more information and reviewing local records.Police said they presented the case on Aug. 9 to the Larimer County District Attorney’s Office, and on Aug. 13 a no-bond arrest warrant was issued for Lucas N. Kalisher of Loveland. The suspect was facing charges of second-degree felony assault-strangulation and misdemeanor child abuse, police said. The no-bond designation typically means the suspect cannot be released by paying bail. Kalisher turned himself in to Larimer County Jail the same day the warrant was issued, police said. The Associated Press reported Friday, Aug. 16, that Kalisher's bail was set at $75,000. His name didn't show up in a jail records check Monday; it appears Kalisher has bonded out of custody. His next court date is scheduled for Friday, Aug. 23, the AP said.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A couple of weeks ago, Glenn Beck had British independent journalist Tommy Robinson on the show. Of course, if you look up Robinson online, he’s not referred to as an independent journalist but rather as an “anti-Islam campaigner” and a “far-right extremist.” Why such nasty descriptors? Because Robinson has committed the unforgivable crime of using his so-called freedom of speech to call out a radical leftist government — specifically on the issue of illegal immigration. When a 17-year-old, who some falsely believed was a Muslim immigrant, stabbed three young girls in the U.K., riots broke out across the nation, and Robinson, due to his outspokenness regarding the U.K.’s crisis at the border, was largely blamed for igniting the conflagration. And now Glenn is apparently in the crosshairs for merely interviewing Robinson, as his interview with Robinson has been censored. — (@) “YouTube has taken away some of our freedoms ... because we dared to have a newsmaker on,” he says. Playing a clip of the interview, Glenn proves that Tommy has actually spoken out against the violence that British officials have pinned on him. When Glenn asked Tommy if he was “calling for the rioting, the burning of buildings, and the bricks through windows,” Robinson responded: “I made a video, and I've cut together all the things I've said: 'Do not be violent. You're a moron if you're burning things. Put the bricks down. You're ruining everything.' I have appealed for calm, peace, and love from the start of this, but the truth doesn't matter because my name is banned from Facebook; my name is banned from Instagram; I'm banned from TikTok. So they can tell the public whatever they want, and they're currently saying that I am the instigator of all this violence.” According to Glenn, the reason the interview has been censored is because “YouTube is taking their marching orders from the European Union.” “We now all have to comply with Europe’s standards,” despite the fact that YouTube is an American company. The message Glenn received from YouTube following the censoring of the video stated: “YouTube doesn’t allow hate speech, and in some cases, content that is potentially controversial or offensive. It may remain up, but with some features disabled.” Not only can you not share the video, read the comments, or make a comment, but the video itself cannot be accessed via the Blaze Media article that addressed the interview. “This is a digital ghetto,” Glenn condemns. “YouTube, telling the truth is not inciting violence. Telling the truth is not controversial, and if it’s offensive, get over it.” To see the rest of his scathing commentary, watch the video above. Want more from Glenn Beck?To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

That's Not What 'SUB' Means: Harris Allegedly Replaces Customers in PA Sandwich Shop With Actors