California lawmakers appear almost as afraid of President-elect Donald Trump as they do of the wildfires that have raved 40,000 of their state. With fires still burning across Los Angeles County, California Democrats met to authorize $50 million in the state’s budget to “Trump proof” California.  State Senate Budget Committee Chair Scott Wiener, a Democrat, on Monday said he will amend the legislation to designate $25 million to provide illegal aliens living in California with legal services to avoid deportation. Trump and Tom Homan, whom Trump tapped to be his border czar, have pledged to launch mass deportations of illegal immigrants, beginning with criminal illegal aliens.  “My GOP colleagues say we have to choose between helping LA recover from wildfires & protecting CA from Trump. But we can do both,” Wiener wrote on X.  AccuWeather estimates the total damage and economic loss from the California wildfires to be between $250 billion and $275 billion. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, has proposed at least $2.5 billion in emergency response funding in response to the fire.  But California Democrats are not the only bracing for the changes set to take effect under a Trump administration.  The U.S. military has also been put on notice regarding its DEI policies and previous vaccine mandates. If confirmed as Defense secretary, Pete Hegseth told senators during his hearing Tuesday that he will remove the woke agenda from the U.S. military and reinstate members of the military who were discharged for refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine.  "Tens of thousands of service members who were kicked out because of an experimental vaccine, in President Trumps defense department, they will – be apologized to– reinstituted with pay and rank" – @PeteHegseth ??? pic.twitter.com/dNYCRrim6y— Riley Gaines (@Riley_Gaines_) January 14, 2025 In the now GOP-controlled House, lawmakers on Tuesday passed the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act, dealing a blow to the transgender movement that has sought to erase male and female differences and fling the doors wide open for men to compete in women’s sports.  On this week’s edition of “Problematic Women,” we discuss the ways the incoming Trump administration is putting the radical Left on notice and bringing accountability back to government.  Watch the show above. The post Reckoning: Trump Positioned to Usher in Age of Accountability appeared first on The Daily Signal.

When Sen. Marco Rubio was asked Wednesday how he would define success as secretary of state, for which he has been nominated, he told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee: “The alignment of our foreign policy to our national interest.”  Throughout the hearing, Rubio outlined a foreign policy philosophy of skepticism toward the postwar consensus. “The postwar global order is not just obsolete. It is now a weapon being used against us,” the Florida Republican said. In his opening statement, Rubio thanked God and his parents who immigrated to America from Cuba. He didn’t get very far in his remarks, however, before he was interrupted by left-wing protesters who shouted in both English and Spanish. “I get bilingual protesters,” Rubio quipped.  Rubio went on to characterize the reelection of President Donald Trump as a statement from voters about what they wanted to see from their leaders. “They want a strong America,” he said. He emphasized that it was important that he have State Department staffers who are aligned with Trump’s mission for the department. “The top priority of the United States Department of State will be the United States,” he told committee members. The Florida lawmaker said his decisions would be governed by the answers to three questions: “Does it make America safer?”; “Does it make America stronger?”; and “Does it make America more prosperous?” He contended that one of the centerpieces of American economic diplomacy should be energy. “That is critical if you want to build a manufacturing sector,” Rubio said about supplying developing countries with energy.  On the International Criminal Court issuing an arrest warrant on Nov. 21 for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity, Rubio said he thought the ICC “has done tremendous damage to its credibility.” He described how the Palestinian militant group Hamas had deliberately targeted innocent civilians, killing and kidnapping them, in its Oct. 7, 2023, invasion and attack on Israel, precipitating retaliatory strikes by Israel against Gaza. “They have to defend their national security and their national interest,” Rubio said of Israelis responding to the attack, citing the difference between Hamas using human shields and Israel’s defensive response. The Florida senator also expressed strong support for normalizing relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia, noting that private enterprise would be a linchpin for facilitating that relationship. As the hearing progressed, the world learned of a potential breakthrough deal in ceasefire negotiations between Hamas and Israel, which would also lead to the release of Israeli hostages. Reacting to the news outside the hearing room, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, told reporters, including The Daily Signal, that he didn’t “believe in coincidences,” and that he thinks “President Trump had an impact on this deal, and obviously the Biden administration was eager to wrap this up before they leave office” on Monday. Cornyn noted that he didn’t trust either Hamas or its sponsors in Iran, so the details of the deal matter. When asked whether the potential deal came together because of Trump’s Jan. 7 warning to Hamas that “all hell will break out” if the hostages weren’t freed before his Jan. 20 inauguration, Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, who chairs the Foreign Relations Committee, told reporters, “I think that’s a rhetorical question.” With respect to NATO, Rubio reaffirmed the importance of the alliance. But he pointed out that multiple presidents have demanded that NATO countries need to contribute more to their own defense. “We have to have alliances with strong and capable partners,” Rubio told the panel, noting that some NATO countries have been able to afford generous domestic welfare programs because the United States spends so much on defense.  On the war between Russia and Ukraine, Rubio contended that Moscow would not be able to conquer all of Ukraine, but also that Ukraine wouldn’t be able to push the Russians back to their preinvasion boundaries. “This war has to end,” he said, adding that it’s “going to be very difficult” to negotiate an end to hostilities between the two countries.  Rubio also weighed in on the case of Marc Fogel, a Pennsylvania teacher who has been imprisoned in Russia since August 2021 on trumped-up drug charges. Fogel’s case was raised by freshman Sen. Dave McCormick, R-Pa., and Rubio committed to making it a priority to get Fogel freed and repatriated. On China, Rubio noted its control of the production of many vital resources throughout the world and said Beijing views other Asian nations as tributary states.  Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., asked Rubio whether there was a carrot the United States could offer China in negotiations. The nominee said it was in the interest of both countries to communicate and maintained that China could not be allowed to continue to assume all of the benefits of the international system and none of its obligations.  On the topic of mass illegal immigration and drug smuggling, Rubio expressed a hope that the United States could work with Mexico’s new government to crack down on drug cartels, which he described as having terrorist elements. He said that the cartels also pose a grave risk to Mexican sovereignty. “You can expect President Trump to do whatever it takes,” Rubio said about confronting the crimes of the cartels against the United States. Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., contended that Africa was not receiving enough engagement from the United States. “We could reap a tremendous harvest,” Booker said about investing in relationships with Africa. “It’s been heavily focused on counterterrorism,” Rubio said of U.S. strategy toward the continent, noting that was appropriate, while affirming Booker’s emphasis on strengthening American relations with African nations.  Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., told The Daily Signal in a statement that Rubio “is a strong pick for secretary of state, and he has my full support.” “He will get America back on track and restore our dignity on the world stage. I look forward to confirming Marco and all of Donald Trump’s nominees as quickly as possible, so we can hit the ground running, restoring America’s standing in the world, securing the border, lowering taxes and unleashing American energy.” Peter Parisi contributed to this report. The post Align Foreign Policy ‘to Our National Interest,’ Secretary of State Nominee Rubio Says appeared first on The Daily Signal.

With President Donald Trump’s inauguration less than a week away, Hamas has agreed to a deal that includes a ceasefire and the release of the hostages being held in Gaza.  “Soon, the hostages will be returned home to their families,” President Joe Biden said during a press conference Wednesday afternoon before going on to explain the known details of the agreement.   After 15 months of war between Israel and Hamas following Hamas’ terrorist attack on Oct. 7, 2023, that left 1,200 people dead and another 251 people hostage in Gaza, a ceasefire is expected to being Sunday. The deal, which includes an initial six-week ceasefire, involves three phases, Biden said.   Phase One Phase one of the deal includes an immediate end to the fighting in Gaza, the withdrawal of the Israel Defense Forces from populated areas of Gaza, and the release of 33 hostages, including women, children, the elderly, and wounded.   Biden added that the “Americans will be part of that hostage release in phase one as well,” but did not specify which American hostages remaining in Gaza would be released during the first phase. CNN was the first to report Wednesday night that Israeli American hostages Keith Siegel, 65, and Sagui Dekel-Chen, 36, are among the 33 hostages to be released in phase one. Israeli American Edan Alexander, 21, is not reported to be on the list for release in the first phase. The bodies of four other Americans are also being held in Gaza.   Israel has agreed to release hundreds of Palestinian prisoners in exchange for the hostage, including some terrorists convicted of murder.  Under the agreement, three female hostages are expected to be released in the first days of the ceasefire, followed by another four several days later, and the remaining 26 hostages over the following five weeks.   Stage one also includes an influx of 600 aid trucks into Gaza daily.   Second and Third Phase The details of the second phase of the deal will be negotiated during the initial six-week ceasefire and are to include the release of all living hostages remaining in Gaza. The second phase is slated to also include the full withdrawal of all Israeli troops from Gaza and a permanent end to the war between Israel and Hamas. Even if negotiations on phase two extend past the six weeks, the ceasefire will remain in place as long as negotiations continue, Biden said.   The final phase of the deal includes the return of the remains of killed hostages to their families and the start of a reconstruction plan beginning in Gaza.   How the Hostage Deal Was Reached Negotiations for the deal were held in Qatar and mediated by officials from Qatar, Egypt, and the United States.   President Joe Biden’s envoy Brett McGurk and President-elect Donald Trump’s incoming Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff both attended the talks hosted in recent days that Qatar’s Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani hosted.   U.S. State Department spokesman Matthew Miller told press Wednesday that the involvement of Trump’s team “has been absolutely critical in getting this deal over the line,” adding that since Biden’s term ends in five days, having support from the Trump administration to carry the deal forward is essential.   The president-elect celebrated news of the deal Wednesday, calling it “EPIC,” and pledged that his administration “will continue to work closely with Israel and our allies to make sure Gaza NEVER again becomes a terrorist safe haven.” Trump has warned multiple times in recent weeks that there will be “hell to pay” in the Middle East if the hostages are not released by his inauguration on Jan. 20, a statement that has received widespread praise from hostages’ family members.   “Pretty clearly we see this Trump effect … it’s working,” Adi Alexander, the father of 21-year-old Israeli American hostage Edan Alexander, told The Daily Signal during a recent interview.   It is not yet clear when Edan Alexander will be released, but “whoever comes out from there, it’s a blessing,” Alexander’s father said ahead of the deal’s release. Israeli American Dekel-Chen is expected to be released in phase one. He is a husband and father of three girls, the youngest of whom he has never met because she was born two months after he was taken hostage.   “I would say all of the hostage families, and I would say almost all Israelis, were incredibly appreciative of that clear statement from the president-elect,” Jonathan Dekel-Chen, the father of Sagui Dekel-Chen, told The Daily Signal shortly after Trump issued his warning to the Middle East in December.   Israeli American hostage Siegel is also expected to be released in the first phase of the deal. Aviva Siegel, the wife of Keith Siegel, has been waiting for her husband’s release since she was set free from captivity during a short ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas in November 2023.   “My heart will explode,” Aviva Siegel told The Daily Signal during an interview in December when asked what she will do when her husband is finally freed. “I will scream. I will jump into the air, and it’s just going to be … I don’t know, I’ll dance. I’m sure that I’ll dance and scream.”   Aviva Siegel and all of the family members of the hostages will soon have the opportunity to “dance and scream” as they are reunited with their loved ones in the coming days, should the deal go through. Following the initial release of the 33 hostages, an additional 61 hostages will remain in Gaza, about half of whom are believed to be dead.   Response in Gaza Following the news of the deal, multiple videos were shared across social media of men cheering in the streets of Gaza and yelling “Allahu Akbar,” which translates to “God is most great.”  HMS militants are currently in the streets of Gaza celebrating this deal as a win over Israel. That’s how bad this deal is.pic.twitter.com/gHpe5zZhlQ— Marina Medvin ?? (@MarinaMedvin) January 15, 2025 Palestinians celebrate in Gaza as ceasefire agreement nears pic.twitter.com/H47QMWpEFE— The Palestine Chronicle (@PalestineChron) January 15, 2025 Senior Hamas official Khalil al-Hayya pegged the deal as a “victory” for Hamas in a speech reported by The Palestinine Chronicle. He added, “We honor all the martyr leaders of Hamas.”  Ahmed F. Alkhatib, a resident senior fellow with the Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative at the Atlantic Council’s Middle East Programs, predicted in a post on X Wednesday evening that “Hamas will regain control of Gaza even while the IDF is there, just as fast as the Taliban took over Afghanistan before the US completed the withdrawal.” He was referring to the fall of Kabul in 2021. “They are literally remerging from displacement tents … with uniforms, insignia, vehicles & guns,” Alkhatib wrote above a the video he shared. Hamas will regain control of Gaza even while the IDF is there, just as fast as the Taliban took over Afghanistan before the US completed the withdrawal. They are literally remerging from displacement tents, as you can see in the 1st video, with uniforms, insignia, vehicles & guns pic.twitter.com/emNmqhIJn4— Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib (@afalkhatib) January 15, 2025 Rep. Mike Waltz, R-Fla., whom Trump has tapped to serve as his national security adviser, told CNN on Wednesday that the incoming Trump administration has “made it very clear to our ally Israel that if Hamas reneges on any parts of this deal, we are with them. And that Gaza will be demilitarized, and Hamas will be destroyed.” “Right now,” Waltz added, “we should be celebrating that we are going to have people coming out alive.” The post 33 Hostages to Be Released in ‘Phase One’ of Deal Between Israel and Hamas  appeared first on The Daily Signal.

A family opened their home to two lone kittens. They hit it off with the house cats and became double trouble. Layla and PipJennyPip, the kitten, was left behind when a community cat moved her kittens before a storm.A Good Samaritan tried to reunite him with his mom, but she wouldn't take him back. While the mom and the other kittens were being cared for, Pip was brought to Jenny, a foster volunteer with Tails High, to give him the best chance to thrive.At one week old, Pip just began to open his eyes. With a ravenous appetite, he often ended each feeding with an adorable milk-mustache. PipJenny"Pip continues to have a good appetite and takes the bottle well. He loves to make biscuits after he eats. He purrs more than most kittens I've fostered at this age. He's just a big ole love bug," Jenny shared.Soon, he grew a round belly and a big voice that he freely used at mealtime. Penny @fosterkittenhqWith good food and plenty of TLC, Pip thrived, and his energy levels soared. He spent his waking hours kneading blankets, being the loudest tiny purr machine, and charming everyone he met.After a hearty meal, he drifted into a food coma, feeling perfectly content. Jenny"He's always searching for Momma or another kitten to cuddle up with. I snuggle him as much as possible but don't quite measure up to having feline companionship."At three weeks old, Pip joined the one-pound club and insisted that he needed a dog bed to match his might. Penny @fosterkittenhqAround that time, Jenny was informed about another kitten who had also been left behind. "A family found her and reached out to the community caretakers in the area for help."They immediately thought of Pip, and Tails High didn't hesitate to bring her into their care. LaylaJenny"What still amazes me after a decade of being involved is how there's this wonderful network of TNR folks, fosters, transporters, and rescues that work together to save lives."Though Pip was about a week younger than the fluffy newcomer, Layla, he was the heftier one. They became fast friends, playing and cuddling together like old pals. JennyAfter a week together, the two began stirring up mischief, with Layla being the more adventurous one. Pip became bolder, trying new things by watching his playmate and following her lead."She's the braver of the two, always on the move. I have to keep a close eye on her." Pip and LaylaJennyThe kittens discovered a file holder by the printer and decided it was the perfect bed despite having many cozy napping options. Layla slipped in first, with Pip soon piling on top of her."I provide these kittens plenty of soft, comfy spots to lounge. And this is what they choose." JennyThey were delighted to meet the resident cats and another foster kitten and joined their cuddle party on the couch. "Pip and Layla have been so good for Cheesy (the ginger foster)."They welcomed her with open paws and made sure she was included in every nap. JennyLayla and Pip are having the time of their lives in foster care, surrounded by great company. True to form, Pip is as chatty as ever, filling the room with his endearing raspy meow. Pip loves talking to his foster momJennyShare this story with your friends. More on Pip, Layla, their friends, and Jenny's fosters on Instagram and Tails High on Instagram.Related story: Cat, Size of a Small Bobcat, Found Wailing in Front of House Until a Couple Scoops Him Up and Finds Him Help

What the End of Affirmative Action DId to Enrollment at 66 Top Schools

Trump Effect: California Throws in EV Truck Mandate Towel

Panama City, FL – Week Two of the $1 billion defamation trial against CNN kicked off Monday with the testimony of CNN chief national security correspondent Alex Marquardt, the architect of the allegedly defamatory report. The key moments from this time on the witness stand were when he refused to apologize to Navy veteran and Plaintiff Zachary Young, doubled down on the false assertions that Young was interested in taking money from Afghans, and getting pressed by plaintiff’s counsel on being war profiteer himself. And perhaps most telling were the nine questions submitted to Marquardt by the jury, which appeared to suggest CNN was in trouble in their eyes. Marquardt was under pressure from the get-go with plaintiff’s lead counsel Vel Freedman asking him if he had reached out to Audible and Bloomberg, two of Young’s clients, to fact-check if he had helped them. "The story was not about Bloomberg and Audible," Marquardt testified. Reading from Marquardt’s deposition testimony, Freedman noted that Marquardt said: "I have not asked about the details [about the evacuations]...I did not want to know..." Marquardt doubled down on that position on the stand. “The corporate evacuations were not something I was interested in,” Marquardt testified; corporate evacuations were all Young did. On the lack of interest in following up with Young’s clients, Marquardt says he didn't reach out to Audible because "it didn't make sense" to him personally because he couldn't understand "why was Audible operating in Afghanistan" because they make audio books. That confusion could have been cleared up with a simple call. A simple Google search by this author turned up a 2012 article from the Pulitzer Center about the importance of audio books in Afghanistan since most people there couldn’t read. Marquardt admitted he did not reach out to Bloomberg the corporation either, instead he contacted former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's (D) personal aides. A lack of remorse was a common theme throughout Marquardt’s testimony. He told the jury that "it's always the hope" that CNN would spread his story as widely as possible;” and if it was up to him, his offending report would have ran "every single hour" on CNN. He also said he stood by his original offending report and said he didn’t think CNN should have apologized to Young.     Marquardt admitted that he had evidence of actual scams being perpetrated against Afghans trying to get out, and admitted that they didn't include them in the story about Young:  "This was not something we did in this story [about Young]...At the end we didn't report about scams..." Despite the court ruling on the facts of the case being that Young did not take money from Afghans, Marquardt falsely testifies that Young was charging "regular people" and not corporations. In cross-examination, despite the evidence that Young's first questions to potential clients were about corporate sponsorships, Marquardt was still falsely claiming Young was looking for average people to pay him.  Marquardt was also questioned about something NewsBusters reported exclusively: his deposition admission of no evidence of wrongdoing by Young. When asked about how he had "no evidence Mr. Young took advantage of an Afghan," Marquardt tried to weasel an answer about how Young was "taking advantage" of the situation in Afghanistan by "doing business." Under pressure, Marquardt admitted he had "no evidence" of Mr. Young taking advantage of an Afghan. And when asked about how he had "no evidence" of Young exploiting an Afghan, Marquardt agreed. In an attempt to twist his own words, Marquardt pivoted to saying Young was "exploiting the situation and not the people." Despite insisting that they never accused Young of scamming people, Marquardt was confronted with messages where he claimed what Young was doing was "a scam" "100 percent." He tried to argue that there was only a possibility of a scam, but Freedman points out there was no ambiguity, he believed it "100 percent."     When pressed on all his cursing about Young in private messages, Maquardt didn’t really have any good answers. When he was confronted with a message where he agreed that Young had “a punchable face,” Marquardt claimed the "right" he wrote was not him agreeing that Young had a "punchable face" but was him being “agreeable” with a colleague. Despite all the evidence of CNN reporters cursing Young, Marquardt insisted  no one at CNN "hated" Young. "That's correct" was Marquardt's response to questions about how CNN did not tell Young he was a subject of a report until hours before it aired. Marquardt declared that he was not angry when Young messaged him back (the first time they spoke ever, 2 hours before the segment ran). He was immediately confronted with his text to an editor which read "Fucking Young just texted.” Marquardt was asked to read the message out loud but was hesitant because he didn’t want to curse in court; Freedman told Marquardt he's the one who wrote it.     In cross-examination, Marquardt said he wanted the jury to see the messages of him and his colleagues cursing out Young because it was evidence of all the "research" he did for the story. Marquardt claimed he didn't hold "personal animosity" against Young, despite cursing him out in private messages. "You take your personal feelings and you put them aside. You just report the facts," the CNN reporter asserted. The two conflicting gripes Marquardt had with Young were about how Young was running his business in terms of evacuations. Firstly, he wanted to know how Young "could justify" charging the prices he was citing; his second issue was that Young was only working with corporately sponsored Afghans (the only ones who could afford it). Throughout different points in his testimony, Marquardt brought up his disgust at Young’s business turning a “profit” for his network putting their lives on the line to get people out. Marquardt touted one instance of a man who got out of Afghanistan "for free" because an NGO helped get him out. But that was essentially the same thing that was happening with the people Young evacuated. The people in-country got out for free and corporations paid for them.     He repeatedly talked about how CNN’s questions to Young were about trying to get to the bottom of how he could “justify” his prices, but at no point did Marquardt state what the correct price was. That didn’t stop him from suggesting it was morally wrong for Young to make money off the evacuations. He seemed to be unaware that the jury pool was asked during selection if they thought it was wrong for a security contractor to make such money. No one raised their hand. Things got contentious when Freedman’s redirect put extra focus on Marquardt and war correspondents essentially being war profiteers in their own way. Marquardt argued it was suspicious that Young didn't want to say how much money he made from evacuations, but when asked if he felt comfortable saying how much his salary was, CNN’s lead counsel Axelrod objected and there was no answer. Hand-written juror questions were something unique in Florida’s court system and could be a way for counsel to judge where the jury was at. But if some of the questions the six jurors and one alternate (one juror called in sick) asked Marquardt were any indication, CNN wasn’t in a good place. As read by Judge Willaim Scott Henry:  Why, after several examples of Mr. Young cut off communication with people without [corporate] funds, did you still feel as if he was still exploiting Afghans? … Do you and your colleagues believe that Mr. Young should have evacuated anyone who requested help without charging? … How do you feel knowing that Mr. Young can no longer work in the space that he is trained on as a result of your piece? Further in redirect, Marquardt says he was "proud" of his story and was "not sorry" for it.  

Wednesday afternoon brought us the final Biden White House press briefing and, by her own count, the 306th featuring the ever-inept Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre. It featured Jean-Pierre emotionally patting herself on the back, plenty of unanswered questions (mostly stemming from the monumental Israel-Hamas ceasefire deal), the final Jacqui Time, and even Jean-Pierre doing her own impression of the shrug emoji. And, in reporting made public during the briefing, it was revealed Jean-Pierre had one last bitter bullet full of arrogance and jealousy to fire toward White House National Security Communications Adviser John Kirby as she blocked him from speaking to the press corps. It began with remarks about the Middle East and then a six-minute-plus speech from Jean-Pierre reflecting on her time in the administration, helping President Biden restore the “norm” of briefings since his administration “understand[s] that a free press is a cornerstone of our nation and that the job you do questioning leaders and holding the powerful accountable is important[.]” She went onto offer DEI-tinged lines about hopefully having been only the first “barrier-breaking” press secretary, thanking press staff over the last four years by name, and choking up talking about her family and daughter: WATCH: An emotional KJP remarks on her time as Press Secretary at the top of her final White House press briefing (after starting with notes about the Israel-Hamas deal)... “Before I even move forward — uh — to taking your questions, I want to do one of those — uh — as a — as a… pic.twitter.com/VAc9cXcd52 — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 15, 2025 Much of the substantive questions concerned the ceasefire and hostage deal, particularly whether the Biden administration should credit the incoming Trump administration with helping to move the seemingly intractable talks to the finish. A few also threw in questions inviting Jean-Pierre to reflect on her last four years. CBS’s Weijia Jiang wondered whether she had any regrets (which she said she wouldn’t entertain quite yet): CBS’s @Weijia Jiang: “And then finally for you because you've clearly reflected on your role as press secretary, is there anything you wish you had done or said differently during your time?” KJP: “Well, I will have a lot of time to reflect, right? You're not gonna catch me up… pic.twitter.com/R1ycaBHCkC — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 15, 2025 The regime’s apple polisher — ABC’s Mary Bruce — had more of a softball question about incoming Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt: ABC’s @MaryKBruce: “And just on a slightly more personal note, on this, your 306th briefing, What advice do you have for your success?” KJP: “So I was asked this question, I think, when my successor was — um — was announced and it's pretty much the same, which is, you know,… pic.twitter.com/wXgaFaJpWZ — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 15, 2025 A few minutes later, Bruce’s ABC colleague Karen Travers wondered if Biden would be following tradition in leaving a letter in the Resolute Desk for his successor. Unsurprisingly, Jean-Pierre claimed she hadn’t thought about that and thus never asked the President. CNN’s Kayla Tausche had a far tougher retrospective question: CNN’s @KaylaTausche: “And just, finally, Karine, a new CNN poll that's out this morning shows that just 36% of US adults say they approve of the way that Biden has handled the presidency. To what do you attribute that?” KJP: “I mean, look — I've been very careful in talking… pic.twitter.com/mTYZJGtKBD — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 15, 2025 NBC’s Peter Alexander — who’s shown at times a spine in giving it to his fellow liberals — had two remarkable questions about Biden ducking presidential norms by skipping a year-end press conference in December and a farewell presser:     Alexander’s second question stung: “Is there any concerns about his public performance in a setting like that?” When Jean-Pierre stammered that Biden “literally did a press conference” on Friday after remarks about the economy and sanctions, Alexander clapped back: “Candidly, that’s different, you know, than an hour-long press conference. That’s why I asked the question.” Jean-Pierre skated by with bland platitudes about him having taken “questions on an array of issues” recently and that he “understand[s] how important you all are to our democracy and understanding how having that continuation of a back and forth[.]” Bloomberg’s Jenny Leonard had this remarkable back-and-forth on this taking-the-credit hullabaloo, which resulted in Jean-Pierre dissing State Department spokesman Matt Miller as just some “random person”: WATCH: KJP dismisses the State Department spokesman Matt Miller as just some “random person” inside the Biden administration.... Bloomberg’s @Jendeben: “Karine, we’re sort of dancing around who gets to take credit for this deal.” KJP: “No one’s dancing around here!” Leonard:… pic.twitter.com/rdmfSc8FuS — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 15, 2025 Showing her mettle, Leonard even touched the sensitive rail by wondering where Kirby was. Jean-Pierre’s dislike was evident as she wouldn’t even say his name. Bloomberg’s @Jendeben: “[T]his is really a big day on the foreign policy national security front. This is your last briefing — or the administration's last briefing. Is there a reason why John Kirby isn't here to take your questions?” KJP: “So, look — um — I just mentioned that… pic.twitter.com/FAOwwiNvPc — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 15, 2025 After CBS News Radio’s Linda Kenyon got Jean-Pierre to say she hasn’t talked to Leavitt, the final tussle with Fox’s Jacqui Heinrich commenced, starting with the hostage deal and followed up by wondering what the point of her coming out to speak on the deal was if she couldn’t provide more information. JACQUI TIME: “How many Americans are going to be in the first tranche, and when will they start coming out?” KJP: “Uh — it's a good question. That's why Brett McGurk is going to be holding — uh — this National Security Council call. He will have all of that information. The… pic.twitter.com/RspG8SSaxi — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 15, 2025 Seeming to allude to the Kirby icing, she said reporters “were under the impression that there were folks here in the building who had answers,” but alas, it wasn’t happening. Heinrich also gave it the old college try on the credit talk. At one point, Heinrich said she wondered why Jean-Pierre wouldn’t “just say your view, which seems to be that Trump gets no credit.” Things got tense as Heinrich tried to work in on final question about the regime’s transparency:     Thankfully, the question Jean-Pierre moved onto was critical as it concerned the report from Special Counsel David Weiss on his investigation into Hunter Biden: .@WSJ’s @Catherine_Lucey: “Could you respond to the report released by the special counsel who prosecuted Hunter Biden? Specifically, he talked about Biden's claims that his son was unfairly targeted and said the president's characterizations are incorrect based on the facts in… pic.twitter.com/ZsbMTz0lFO — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 15, 2025 Globo TV’s Raquel Krähenbühl had the distinction (or infamy) of having the final exchange. She first expressed concern about whether Biden’s “afraid...part of his legacy could be or it’s about to be erased by the incoming President.” Jean-Pierre only stuck to domestic issues and the bipartisan pieces of legislation (except for the Inflation Reduction Act), which triggered a follow-up about foreign policy. One final bumbling, fumbling answer later, it was time to say goodbye. Jean-Pierre tried to leave, but Krähenbühl tried again about the Leavitt question. When Jean-Pierre doubled down she hadn’t spoken to her, the AP’s Zeke Miller spoke up, leading to this: WATCH: The final moments of the last ever WH briefing with KJP has a fitting end – an unanswered question, a literal shrug emoji, and reporters chuckling that she’d tell them privately what she thinks about @KarolineLeavitt.... KJP: “All right guys, I have to go. Thank you.”… pic.twitter.com/kGqi5Holbd — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 15, 2025 How fitting an end for both Jean-Pierre and the corporate liberals in the seats. To see the relevant transcript from the January 15 briefing, click here.

Panama City, FL -- Something special about the judicial system in Florida is, baring objection of counsels and the court, jurors get to ask questions of the witnesses. These questions could be used to judge a jury’s temperament and possible mindset as a trial unfolds. In the case of the $1 billion defamation trial against CNN, on Wednesday, the tea leaves seem to indicate that they’re not looking to favorably on CNN just hours before they’re set to start deliberations. The questions to CNN reporter Katie Bo Lillis (pictured above) pressed her on her treatment of Navy veteran and Plaintiff Zachary Young, and called into question her and CNN’s apparent thought that people were “obliged” to speak to CNN. Noting that “for the record, there were no objections to the questions from counsel or the court,” Judge William Scott Henry of the 14th Judicial Circuit of Florida read the questions. The first two questions were seemingly indictments of CNN’s arrogance and approach to investigating stories: HENRY: Do you feel that Americans are obligated to you/CNN? LILLIS: No. No one is obligated to speak to us. It is their free decision if they choose to or don’t chose to. HENRY: All right. To what length must someone go to in order not to speak to you? Must they speak to you to not speak with you? LILLIS: [Laughter] That’s a really good question. There’s a lot of people that I have a responsibility to. Throughout the trial, the jurors have been seeing the private messages and testimonies of CNN journalists like Lillis and Alex Marquardt where they openly treat refusal to talk to them or pull back as “suspicious,” to quote the latter.     “At what point do you accept someone not wishing to speak or comment?” a juror wanted to know. To which Lillis replied: “It very, very much depends on the context. It depends on what – what judgement I – you know, I or my news organization can make about what the greater priority is.” The questions to Lillis were also very pointed. Like one this where the juror confronted how Lillis approached her interaction with Young: HENRY: “A chance to make your case to keep your name out of it” sounds akin to “guilty until proven innocent,” can you clarify how your approach is really the opposite, “innocent until proven guilty?” LILLIS: Well, first of all, we’re not a court of law. The standard for whether someone’s conduct is newsworthy, whether it winds up in a news article is not whether it’s illegal or not it’s um – it’s – in this instance it is you know, whether it should be exposed that someone could be profiting off of the misery of Afghans. “Can you understand, given this fresh perspective, that your approach could scare someone?” Henry asked as the follow up from the same juror. A lot of the defensive testimony from Lillis and Marquardt revolved around how they personally didn’t like how Young disengaged from Afghans who didn’t fit his requirement of needing a corporate sponsor. So, one of the jurors asked: “If Mr. Young cannot help an Afghan, what do you fell is an appropriate way to disengage?” As NewsBusters previously reported with Marquardt, the juror questions to him weren’t favorable either: Why, after several examples of Mr. Young cut off communication with people without [corporate] funds, did you still feel as if he was still exploiting Afghans? (…) Do you and your colleagues believe that Mr. Young should have evacuated anyone who requested help without charging? (…) How do you feel knowing that Mr. Young can no longer work in the space that he is trained on as a result of your piece? And with the testimony of CNN senior editor Thomas Lumley, it was the lack of questions that was telling. As this author chronicled in an X thread,  Lumley’s testimony featured him getting grilled repeatedly on internal CNN messages he sent where he was openly critical of Marquardt’s report; worried about it being “full of holes like Swiss cheese” and “80% emotion and 20% obscured fact,” among other criticisms. Lumley’s testimony lasted hours and was apparently so thorough that the jurors felt they had all the information they needed from him. Witness testimony appears to be set to wrap up Thursday with CNN vice president for newsgathering Adam Levine. The jurors were set to begin deliberations not long after.

Carbon forms the basis of plant life and emerges from nearly all energy sources, aside from nuclear power, that keep us warm. With forecasts predicting a prolonged cold spell for much of the country, now is the time to end the war on carbon, human life, and effective energy production. Wyoming conservatives offer a solution with SF 92, the “Make Carbon Dioxide Great Again” bill.For years, most Republican governors have embraced or tolerated the push for “carbon neutral” energy — also known as transitioning away from reliable energy sources to less effective options that harm land and the environment. They mainly differ from Democrats on how quickly to pursue this potential energy nuclear winter. In Wyoming, where the governor supports going “carbon negative,” a group of conservatives is taking the offensive, rejecting the idea that carbon is the problem instead of a key driver of the economy.Most Americans are staying warm this winter because of carbon-based fuels. Let’s stop demonizing them.State Sen. Cheri Steinmetz and former Wyoming Freedom Caucus Chairman John Bear introduced legislation that would prohibit the state from restricting carbon-based energy sources or treating carbon like a pollutant. The measure specifically overturns a five-year-old liberal law requiring coal-fired power plants to use “carbon capture” technology.Wyoming should lead the nation in coal production, but the industry has been crushed by the carbon hoax. The state government has only advanced the hoax instead of fighting it. Under the new bill, Wyoming would reimburse consumers for fees paid under the mandatory carbon capture retrofitting program.Most important, the bill begins with several pages of findings debunking the idea that carbon dioxide is a pollutant, that it causes the climate to warm, and that human activity significantly contributes to such warming. It calls carbon “a foundational nutrient necessary for all life on earth,” a stance every Republican-led legislature needs to adopt.The most consequential lie of our timeHuman activity accounts for only about 4% of atmospheric carbon, leaving the exact share of carbon dioxide increases caused by humans in dispute. A recent paper in the journal Health Physics by University of Massachusetts Lowell researchers, using Carbon-14 data, concluded that only 12% of CO2 added to the atmosphere since 1750 is man-made — “much too low to be the cause of global warming,” they write.That’s why we have no clear correlation, let alone proof of causation, between energy usage and higher carbon levels, or between those higher carbon levels and rising temperatures. For instance, although renewables increased by 12% and coal use dropped by 8% in 2022, U.S. carbon emissions still rose by 1.3%. Climate conspiracists have gotten what they want, even though human input remains too small to affect processes that clearly play out over thousands of years.And there is certainly no evidence that carbon systematically causes irrevocable warming across the globe. Greenpeace co-founder Dr. Patrick Moore says carbon dioxide typically lags about 800 years behind temperature increases, which he believes indicates that higher temperatures come first and rising CO2 follows. “There is no situation where we have proven that CO2 is the cause and temperature is the effect. None,” he said. “There isn’t any situation where we can actually say we know that from empirical evidence, from science.”Moore observes that warmer periods began long before modern industrialization. For instance, the 1930s dust bowls in the United States set numerous high-temperature records. One study found that Italy was 3 to 4 degrees Celsius warmer 10,000 to 12,000 years ago, despite CO2 levels then being 20% below the preindustrial level of 280 parts per million.Moore says the current warming trend has lasted about 300 years, beginning 150 years before fossil fuels came into broad use. He argues the warming rate hasn’t changed despite exponential increases in carbon emissions, concluding that “it hasn’t moved the thermometer in the slightest.”“And that’s kind of all people have to know to see that they’re being tricked.”CO2 has nothing to do with itSome scientists argue warming trends align more with absorbed solar radiation than with carbon dioxide levels, which they say explains why observed warming isn’t uniform. A new study from multiple southern-state earth science departments reports that the Southeast United States has been cooling for the past 120 years, despite emissions and the urban heat island effect.Other studies suggest cloud cover and other complex meteorological factors drive various warming cycles at different times and places. One study identifies the jet stream as a “dynamic driver of climate variability” going back to 1300.Some researchers attribute warming trends to rising sea surface temperatures rather than emissions, arguing that emissions are “irrelevant” compared to cyclical ocean changes. They add that human activity cannot meaningfully heat the oceans, noting a study showing the atmosphere — whatever it contains — only influences the top 0.01 millimeter of the ocean’s surface.Finally, critics say it’s naïve to think we can measure every corner of the Earth’s temperature for the past 150 years and predict the next century within a degree Fahrenheit. Another recent study, confirmed by NASA satellite data, suggests that from 1880 to 2020, global warming estimates were inflated by 42% because of aging weather stationsThis lie is too dangerous to ignore, and Republicans must stop parroting it. We should end the practice of ruining our lives and the environment in service of the carbon hoax.Every state should pass legislation like Wyoming’s SF 92 and eliminate any mention — let alone a mandate — of anti-carbon policies. At the federal level, Congress must repeal all anti-carbon mandates and subsidies, including the carbon capture grift.What better time to champion common sense than a month when much of the country is bracing for freezing temperatures? Despite hundreds of billions in subsidies, a monopoly on public discourse, and anti-carbon mandates, solar and wind still provide only about 10% of electricity — and most of that comes from areas not facing extreme cold. Most Americans are staying warm this winter because of carbon-based fuels. Let’s stop demonizing them.