Former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris will confront one another in person for the first time Tuesday evening as they face off during the presidential debate on ABC.  Though the second presidential debate of the season for Trump, this will be Harris’ first time going toe-to-toe with Trump after President Joe Biden withdrew from the race following his disastrous debate performance on June 27.  The Trump-Harris debate, which begins at 9 p.m. EDT, is being held at Philadelphia’s National Constitution Center.  The candidates have made their dislike for one another abundantly clear in the weeks leading up to the debate; so, will they be able to maintain a sense of decorum and remain focused on policy issues? How will Harris address the high inflation rate under the Biden administration? And will Trump clarify his position on abortion?  Tune into today’s bonus episode of the “Problematic Women” podcast with guest Emily Jashinsky, UnHerd’s Washington, D.C., correspondent and host of “Undercurrents,” as we discuss what to watch for during tonight’s debate.  Watch the show above or listen to the audio only below. The post What to Watch for During Trump-Harris Debate Showdown appeared first on The Daily Signal.

'Incredible': Even CNN Notices that Harris Is the Extremist in 2024

A curious near miss appears to suggest that up close, we're just not that appealing.

The wave of plasma is expected to reach us around midday today.

Multiple corners of the internet were roiled by the news that Univision and senior anchor Jorge Ramos agreed to part ways at the end of the year. While this is a welcome development, I would urge caution against labeling this move as indicative of any sort of ideological shift at the network. Watch as Ramos announces his departure at the end of last night’s Noticiero Univision: NOTICIERO UNIVISION 9/9/24 6:58 PM JORGE RAMOS: In closing, I have something personal to tell you. I’m leaving Univision. The company and I have mutually agreed not to renew the contract that expires at the end of the year. I will remain on this newscast and on Al Punto until December. This has been a sad, difficult decision and it took a great deal of time. Thus ends my 40 years at Univision, 38 of which were at the helm of this newscast, and 17 hosting Al Punto. I am deeply grateful for these four decades. Univision has literally been my second home and I’m very proud to have been part of this great team of journalists that have consolidated leadership over the years. They are my friends. They’re right there behind the camera. They are my family, and I wish them the best of luck. Afterwards, of course, I’ll tell you about my professional plans. There is much left to do in journalism and this truly fills me with excitement. For the time being, all that remains is to thank those of you who watch us every night, who have joined us for such a long period of time, with so much affection and loyalty. And thank you, Ilia. To Maria Elena Salinas, Andrea Cutias and Teresa Rodriguez, with whom I’ve had the honor and responsibility of hosting this newscast. And as I mentioned, this is not an immediate goodbye. We’ll be back here tomorrow with the news.  Ramos’ farewell closely mirrors language from the network’s press release, specifically, the mutual decision to allow the contract to expire with no extension: Noticias Univision, the leading Spanish-language news and information platform in the U.S., announced today that Univision News and Jorge Ramos have mutually agreed not to renew their soon-to-expire contract agreement. Ramos will step down from his role as co-anchor of Noticiero Univision at the end of 2024, following the U.S. Presidential Election. To be crystal clear, an announced mutual decision to non-renew is the most elegant of firings. If I walk into a car dealership, offer $30K for the model on sale for $40K and get laughed out of the showroom, then we mutually agreed not to come together on a deal for a car. In this case, “mutual agreement” is a red flag indicating that Ramos refused to accept whatever the network was offering him in order to extend. Per sources with knowledge of the situation, Ramos was offered a contract extension in exchange for significantly reduced compensation (from a figure reportedly somewhere between Muir and Holt money), and a significantly reduced role wherein he would no longer be the face of the news division. Being forced off the anchor desk and relegated to a weekly role was apparently a step too far for Ramos.  It is clear that TelevisaUnivision wants to take its U.S.-based news division in a different direction. I would caution against anyone inferring that the firing of Ramos represents a shift to the right. It does not.  Televisa’s rumored replacement of Ramos with Enrique Acevedo does NOT represent a shift to the right, no matter how much the Professional Latinx may squeal to that effect, but a shift away from open activism and towards the appearance of something representing “mainstream” media.  For the last decade, we’ve described Univision as an activist organization with a broadcast license and regurgitator of Democrat talking points. These assessments were driven, primarily, by the performance of Jorge Ramos as lead anchor and public face of the news division. For over a decade, MRC Latino has made crystal clear that there could be no true reform at Univision so long as Ramos remained in place. Now that he’s on his way out, we’ll see just how serious the reformers are. In the coming days and weeks, we'll complete our assessment of the damage that Ramos' brand of journalism has done to our political discourse, and catalogue some of his worst demagoguery. For now, we welcome these developments but remain focused on fighting Spanish-language disinformation at its biggest source: corporate Spanish-language news media.  

Múltiples rincones del Internet se vieron conmocionados por la noticia de que Univisión y su presentador principal de noticias acordaron desvincularse a finales de año, tras la expiración del contrato de jorge Ramos. Si bien se trata de un avance positivo, insto a que se tenga cuidado con etiquetar esta medida como indicativa de cualquier tipo de cambio ideológico en la cadena. Véase cómo Ramos anuncia su salida al final de la entrega de anoche del Noticiero Univision: NOTICIERO UNIVISION 9 DE SEPTIEMBRE 2024 6:58 PM JORGE RAMOS: Y para terminar, tengo algo personal que contarles. Voy a dejar Univisión. La empresa y yo de común acuerdo decidimos no renovar el contrato que termina a fin de año. Continuaré en este noticiero y Al Punto hasta diciembre. Ha sido una decisión difícil, triste, y tomó mucho tiempo. Así terminan mis 40 años en Univisión, 38 de los cuales estuve al frente de este noticiero y 17 conduciendo Al Punto. Estoy profundamente agradecido por estas cuatro décadas. Univision literalmente ha sido mi segunda casa y estoy muy orgulloso de pertenecer a este gran equipo de periodistas que ha logrado consolidar el liderazgo a lo largo de los años. Ellos son mis amigos. Están ahí detrás de cámara. Son mi familia y les deseo la mejor de las suertes. Después, por supuesto, les contaré mis planes profesionales. Hay mucho por hacer en el periodismo y eso realmente me llena de entusiasmo. Por el momento sólo me queda agradecerles a ustedes que nos ven cada noche, que me han acompañado durante tanto tiempo, con tanto cariño y fidelidad. Y gracias a tí, Ilia. A María Elena Salinas, Andrea Cutias y a Teresa Rodríguez, con quienes he tenido el honor y la responsabilidad de conducir este noticiero. Y como mencioné, no es un adiós inmediato. Mañana aquí seguimos con las noticias.  El adiós de Ramos refleja fidedignamente el lenguaje del comunicado de prensa de TelevisaUnivision, en concreto, la decisión mutua de dejar que el contrato expire sin extender: Noticias Univision, la plataforma líder de noticias e información en español en Estados Unidos, anunció hoy que Univision y Jorge Ramos acordaron mutuamente no renovar el contrato que está por expirar. Ramos dejará su rol como copresentador de Noticiero Univision a fines del año, luego de las elecciones presidenciales de Estados Unidos de 2024. Para ser claros, una decisión mutua anunciada de no renovar es la más elegante de las botadas. Si entro en un concesionario de automóviles y ofrezco 30,000 dólares por el modelo en oferta por 40,000 dólares, y me sacan del concesionario a carcajada limpia, entonces acordamos mutuamente no llegar a un acuerdo sobre la compra de un automóvil. En este caso, el “acuerdo mutuo” es una señal de alerta que indica que Ramos se negó a aceptar lo que la cadena le ofrecía para quedarse. Según fuentes con conocimiento de la situación, a Ramos se le ofreció una extensión de contrato a cambio de una compensación significativamente reducida, y un rol significativamente reducido en el que ya no sería el rostro de la división de noticias. El ser obligado a dejar la mesa de presentador y ser relegado a un rol semanal aparentemente fue demasiado para Ramos.  Está claro que TelevisaUnivisión quiere llevar su división de noticias con sede en Estados Unidos en una dirección diferente a la actual. Yo advertiría contra la inferencia que el despido de Ramos representa un giro hacia la derecha. No es así.  El supuesto reemplazo de Ramos con Enrique Acevedo por parte de Televisa NO representa un giro hacia la derecha, no importa cuánto los “Latinx Profesionales” (el activismo y conentariado vinculado al Partido Demócrata) chillen en ese sentido, sino un alejamiento del activismo abierto y hacia la apariencia de algo que se aproxime más al llamado “mainstream media”.  Durante la última década, hemos descrito a Univisión como una organización activista con licencia de transmisión y repetidora de puntos demócratas. Estas evaluaciones fueron impulsadas, principalmente, por el desempeño de Jorge Ramos como presentador principal y rostro público de la división de noticias.  MRC Latino ha dejado muy claro que no podría haber una verdadera reforma en Univisión mientras Ramos permaneciera en el cargo. Ahora que está a punto de salir, veremos cuán serios son los reformadores. En los próximos días y semanas, completaremos nuestra evaluación del daño que el “periodismo” de Ramos ha causado a nuestro discurso político, y catalogaremos algunas de sus peores demagogias. Por ahora, recibimoss con beneplácito estos avances, pero seguimos centrados en luchar contra la desinformación en español en su principal fuente: los medios noticiosos corporativos en español.  

In the wake of a court ruling that Google acted as a monopoly by illegally dominating the internet search market, many are wondering: Is YouTube next? Managing editor for Blaze Media’s Return Peter Gietl joins Jill Savage and the “Blaze News Tonight” panel to discuss whether or not YouTube could also be subject to an antitrust lawsuit. “Should YouTube be investigated for potential antitrust violations?” asks Jill. “Absolutely,” is Gietl’s answer. “They’ve exhibited behavior for going on decades now of collusion and monopolistic practices – stifling competitors, price gouging, price fixing. I mean there’s really an argument to be made for this,” he says. Blaze Media editor in chief Matthew Peterson wonders “how we got to this situation” in the first place. According to Gietl, it all started in the mid-90s when DARPA (the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), a research and development agency of the U.S. Department of Defense, funded Google for the sake of creating online libraries. Seems innocent enough. However, online libraries weren't the only thing DARPA was funding. “They wanted the ability to track search queries,” says Gietl. “They thought if they could keep track of different groups and what they were searching, it would be an extremely powerful tool to track the population.” “Google came out of that original funding, so they’ve had a long and storied history of collusion with the alphabet agencies,” he explains. Today, “Google controls 90% of search, and I think most of the rest of it runs through YouTube, which is also owned by Google,” Gietl continues. “Any business that wants to advertise has to play in their sandbox, and they have to follow their rules, and they control basically all of the online advertising and search queries in the entire world.” “We know that they're suppressing the content of conservatives and conservative speech,” says Jill, pointing to how Blaze content is constantly warring against censorship barriers. Gietl says that while we technically are a free market, society no longer operates as such, given that the smaller entities are up against “giant players,” like Google, “that wield tremendous amounts of power.” “Like any company on the right, [Blaze Media] would prefer not to be in business with these people at all,” says Peterson, “but the problem is if you want to reach people and you actually want to generate revenue, you don't have an alternative ecosystem that's large enough to do that.” “When we put out a video onto YouTube and we talk about certain topics, we know that we'll be demonetized, that we will be taken down, that they'll shut our whole channel down,” he laments, adding that that’s why it’s so important to get your content directly from the source. “This is why we need you to just subscribe and support us directly, because the more people that do that, the more we don't have to worry about any of this,” he says. “Do you think this court decision against Google will have any real-life impact?” Peterson asks. To hear Gietl’s answer, watch the clip above. Want more from 'Blaze News Tonight'?To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

After keeping potential voters in the dark about her intentions for several weeks, Kamala Harris quietly uploaded a policy platform to her website Sunday evening. While the Harris campaign likely figured this would keep critics at bay, keen observers noticed something awfully familiar about the agenda and soon discovered the reason why, lurking just beneath the surface. Harris appears to have copied and pasted parts or perhaps the entirety of her platform directly from the Biden campaign page without bothering to cover her tracks. 'Join our campaign to re-elect Joe Biden today.' The dead giveaway, highlighted by multiple X users late Sunday and then subsequently by the New Republic, was that the new issues section of Harris' website — titled "A New Way Forward - Kamala Harris for President" — contained metadata clearly ported over from the Biden campaign's issues page, including the line, "Together, we can finish the job for the American people. Are you with us? Join our campaign to re-elect Joe Biden today." The Biden-branded metadata appeared in the website's description on Google searches as well as when links to the website were shared online, meaning neither an amateur sleuth nor a tech wizard were needed to expose the platform copy-and-paste. It appears the Harris campaign has since deleted the remaining evidence of its political plagiarism. 'More of the same.' This amounts to another major narrative setback for Harris. After all, she has worked desperately to disentangle herself from President Joe Biden since replacing him as the Democratic candidate. It also undoes the supportive efforts of liberal publications like Politico, which have worked feverishly to gloss over her complicity in Biden's failings and criticized those who would dare "tether Harris to Biden." The latest poll from New York Times/Siena College indicated that this desperation to distinguish Harris from Biden is justified. When asked whether then next president should represent a major change from Joe Biden, 63% of respondents answered, "Major change." When asked whether Harris represents change or more of the same, 56% of respondents said, "More of the same." Only 25% said she represented a major change. The exposé of Harris' policy copy-and-paste is hardly the first strong indication that the Democratic presidential candidate is little more than a new face for the same political machine. The 2024 Democratic Party platform released by the Democratic National Convention's platform committee last month failed to swap out Biden's name in various places for that of his vice president, leaving some to conclude there would be little difference between a second Biden term and a first Harris term. The 92-page document referenced Biden's "second term" over 18 times. In his recent interview with Tucker Carlson, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. provided a startling insight into why the Democratic presidential candidates might be so interchangeable. "When you talk to Democrats about, you know, 'Do you really think it's a good idea to be electing somebody who cannot give an interview?' they say, 'Well ... you're electing the people around her, you're electing the apparatus,'" said Kennedy. "The apparatus, I don't have any faith in it." Blaze News reached out to the Harris campaign for comment but did not immediately receive a response. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Iran has repeatedly tried to do me harm in the United States. Congress must strengthen the government’s ability to fight such transnational repression.

 Winston Churchill was “a chief villain of world war 2?” Well, that’s the view (neatly filleted by Andrew Roberts, Churchill’s finest contemporary biographer, National Review’s…