On Saturday's The Weekend: Primetime, MS NOW host Ayman Mohyeldin derided police actions to protect the ICE facility outside Chicago as "the worst of America" as the show gave a forum to a liberal clergyman to excoriate ICE's treatment of illegal aliens. And MS NOW contributor Eddie Glaude went on to compare arresting illegal aliens to capturing fugitive slaves in the 1850s. Reverend Michael Woolf of the Lake Street Church of Evanston was given much of the segment to discuss his recent experience of being arrested by police officers outside the ICE facility in Broadview, Illinois, as he and other protesters tried to move too close to the facility. Woolf wrote a book titled Sanctuary and Subjectivity hailed for better "understanding the ways that white religious liberals can interrogate their whiteness." He repeatedly made provocative accusations against immigration enforcement agents during his ramblings, accusing them of "kidnapping," of running a "concentration camp," or of being part of "tyranny." He asserted: We know what's happening at that facility is pretty much tantamount to torture. It's denial of food, it's unsanitary conditions, and the people who are detained there are detained without any spiritual care whatsoever. So we were there to raise our voices as moral actors and sort of say that we want the folks there to be released, we want the facility to be closed down, and, of course, we want to be able to pray with our neighbors who have been kidnapped from our communities. A bit later, he recalled: I always try to talk to police officers. I try to remind them they have a choice -- that they are protecting what amounts to a concentration camp behind them and they're allowing it to happen. But they have a choice on how they're going to operate with that. Asking a followup question, co-host Ayman Mohyeldin posed that the leftist protesters were the "best" and ICE was the "worst": So, Professor, when you kind of look at this moment, you have both the best and worst of America represented, right? You have people who are standing up for what they believe is right -- trying to convince people to take the moral -- the correct moral action, but, at the same time, you're seeing, as the reverend was saying, the use of violence which is sometimes a deliberate tactic by the state to invoke a certain imagery that the state has a monopoly on power -- absolute use of power -- and can do so against even holy men in our society. Later on, after Reverend Woolf repeated his accusation of "kidnapping" by immigration agents, Glaude made his slavery comparison: WOOLF: We are facing an intense crisis of morality, and it demands people of conscience to be able to say something about it when you have folks coming into communities and kidnapping our neighbors, when you have people who are -- operate with absolute impunity, when you have an authoritarianism that is on the rise, and when you're dealing with tyranny, it's an emergency. And it demands people in all aspects of society and I think faith leaders, too. EDDIE GLAUDE, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Just think about this historic moment. The Fugitive Slave Act, 1850 -- people, slave catchers coming into communities, snatching people, and people have to make a choice. This is not new. This is not. Transcript follows: MS NOW's The Weekend: Primetime November 16, 2025 8:18 p.m. Eastern REVEREND MICHAEL WOOLF, LAKE STREET CHURCH OF EVANSTON: We know what's happening at that facility is pretty much tantamount to torture. It's denial of food, it's unsanitary conditions, and the people who are detained there are detained without any spiritual care whatsoever. So we were there to raise our voices as moral actors and sort of say that we want the folks there to be released, we want the facility to be closed down, and, of course, we want to be able to pray with our neighbors who have been kidnapped from our communities. And so a bunch of faith leaders and I -- we went out into the streets to make those demands known, and we were immediately met with violence which, unfortunately -- as you were talking about -- is an occurrence that's been happening rather often down at Broadview. CATHERINE RAMPELL: It looked -- it looked from the video like you were pointed out by some law enforcement officer and then dragged out. How did they identify you? Why do you think they came after you? WOOLF I'm loud and I'm tall and I -- I -- RAMPELL: Wearing a collar? WOOLF: And wearing a collar, and I'm happy to say exactly what I think, and when I'm talking to police officers -- I always try to talk to police officers. I try to remind them they have a choice -- that they are protecting what amounts to a concentration camp behind them and they're allowing it to happen. But they have a choice on how they're going to operate with that. And I always talk to them, and I always talk about that choice. I was also telling them that we're peaceably assembled, and we absolutely intend to do absolutely no harm. And so eventually there was a lull in the action, and one of the commanders pointed at me and he said, "He's going." And so indeed I was going at that point, and there's really nothing you can do when that happens. ELISE JORDAN: How did the officers respond when you tried to minister to them in that way? WOOLF: You know, I've seen and sometimes made some police officers cry before when you talk about the children who are abducted. Police officers are human beings. I don't agree with some of the tactics that are used at Broadview. I don't agree with them protecting ICE or protecting this facility, but they're human beings. They are capable of conversion and change, and that is really important to note. So, yeah, there's been police officers who have cried when they're being preached to or when they're being talked to. They're moral actors, too. They have choices to make, and I think it's really important to know that. AYMAN MOHYELDIN: So, Professor, when you kind of look at this moment, you have both the best and worst of America represented, right? You have people who are standing up for what they believe is right -- trying to convince people to take the moral -- the correct moral action, but, at the same time, you're seeing, as the reverend was saying, the use of violence which is sometimes a deliberate tactic by the state to invoke a certain imagery that the state has a monopoly on power -- absolute use of power -- and can do so against even holy men in our society. (...) WOOLF: We are facing an intense crisis of morality, and it demands people of conscience to be able to say something about it when you have folks coming into communities and kidnapping our neighbors, when you have people who are -- operate with absolute impunity, when you have an authoritarianism that is on the rise, and when you're dealing with tyranny, it's an emergency. And it demands people in all aspects of society and I think faith leaders, too. EDDIE GLAUDE, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Just think about this historic moment. The Fugitive Slave Act, 1850 -- people, slave catchers coming into communities, snatching people, and people have to make a choice. This is not new. This is not.

Per new polling reported by Gallup, religion is no longer important to most Americans. In response to the question “Is religion an important part of your daily life?” 49% said yes. Ten years ago, in 2015, 66% responded affirmatively. Gallup notes that this 17-point drop “ranks among the largest Gallup has recorded in any country over any 10-year period since 2007.” This departure from religion has partisan characteristics. In 2001, per Gallup, 11% of Democrats and 7% of Republicans said they have no religion. In 2023, this difference widened to 33% of Democrats and 12% of Republicans saying they have no religion. What are the practical implications? Two major social institutions derive authority from religion. One is marriage. We refer to marriage as “holy matrimony.” Another is private property. The eighth commandment says, “Thou shalt not steal.” Regarding marriage, again from Gallup, among 30- to 50-year-olds, in 1981, there was little difference between Democrats and Republicans: 82% of Democrats and 84% of Republicans were married. By 2024, the spread increased to 18 points: 67% of Republicans and 49% of Democrats were married. A reasonable proxy for attitudes about private property is attitudes towards socialism. Socialism disregards the sanctity of private property. A socialist government can take what is Peter’s and redistribute it to Paul. In 2025, 66% of Democrats and 14% of Republicans said they have a “positive” view of socialism. How is this playing out, and how will this play out, regarding day-to-day realities in our country? Let’s consider the unabashed socialist who was just elected mayor of New York City. Among the giveaways he has promised is a freeze on rents. A group of property owners in New York City has filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging the constitutionality of government-imposed rent control. Their claim is that rent control preventing an owner from profitably managing his property violates the Constitution’s “takings” clause. The Constitution’s Fifth Amendment says, “No person shall....be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of the law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” Let’s hope this case finds its way to the Supreme Court. Private property is a core institution of our free nation under God. Let’s also consider those New Yorkers howling about the cost of living in New York City, that their new mayor wants to make happy at the expense of others. Last year, the New York Post reported on a study done by law firm Schmidt and Clark, noting “One in three adults in New York have never been married...17.4% more than the national average.” The study reported on all of New York state, but it’s reasonable to assume that the statistics in New York City are above the state average. Among women in New York, per the study, 36.3% have never married, the highest in the nation. Among men, 41.1% have never married, the second-highest in the nation. The economic penalty of living alone in New York City is the highest in the nation, per real estate platforms StreetEasy and Zillow. They call this the “singles tax”. Per these firms, as reported by CNN, in New York City, “singles pay an average of $20,100 more to live alone.” The siren song of the welfare state culture is the problem does not lie with individual behavior, but getting others to foot the bill. New York City is but a microcosm of our whole nation. The Economic Innovation Group reports that transfer payments -- funds received by one set of citizens that are transferred from other citizens -- total now “almost 18% of total personal income in the United States, up from 8% in 1970.” We are drowning more and more in debt. The answer is the return of individual responsibility and the institutions that enable it. All this is informed by religion, which we must again strengthen. Star Parker is founder of the Center for Urban Renewal and Education. Her recent book, “What Is the CURE for America?” is available now. To find out more about Star Parker and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

When BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales points out the Islamification of the U.S., she gets accused of working for Israel.“I talk about it and people are like, ‘Oh, how’s that $7,000 you got from the Jews to talk about this?’ Like it doesn’t take a rocket scientist,” she says, before pointing out some very easy-to-understand facts — starting with Dearborn, Michigan.According to the 2023 census, Dearborn’s population is 55% Muslim.“They of course blast the call of prayer over giant loudspeakers five times a day as early as 5:00 a.m.,” Gonzales says, playing a clip from a TikTok account called “magamama5,” in which a woman records video as the call to prayer goes off.Dearborn Mayor Abdullah Hammoud even spoke out against assimilation in a recent podcast appearance, saying, “I actually disavow the use of the term the melting pot. I actually don’t like it. Why? Because in a melting pot, when you’re talking about like a soup, everything looks the same, right?”“The lettuce is lettuce, the tomato is tomato, the cucumber is cucumber, and they all complement each other,” he added.“They all complement each other except when the cucumber wants to murder the tomato for not being Muslim,” Gonzales mocks.But Dearborn is far from the only place being taken over.As of 2020, New York housed 343 mosques, California 304, Texas 224, Florida 157, and New Jersey 141.“I mean, you talk about Texas. … Texas is being completely inundated. Forty-eight mosques have opened in the state in the last two years,” Gonzales explains, noting that Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) has given around $13 million of grant money to mosques.And in another clip from New York City, a Muslim speaking at a rally yelled, “This is the correct religion. This is the religion that all of humanity needs to be a part of: Islam. And we will not stop until it enters every home.”“Guys, when someone tells you who they really are, believe them,” Gonzales says.Want more from Sara Gonzales?To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred takes on news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

A handful of Republican lawmakers joined forces with their colleagues across the aisle on Tuesday to shield Democratic House Delegate Stacey Plaskett of the Virgin Islands from consequence over her involvement with infamous sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.Critics have suggested that Republicans spared Plaskett as part of a "back end deal" to save Rep. Cory Mills (R-Fla.), yet another humiliation.'The Plaskett censure failed because house leadership exchanged that censure failure for the withdrawal of a vote to censure and refer Cory Mills.'Among the over 20,000 pages of damning Epstein emails released by the House Oversight Committee last week were numerous text messages between the dead sex offender and Plaskett.While the documents show Jeffrey Epstein was evidently on speaking terms with numerous Democrats after his 2008 felony conviction for procuring a child for prostitution, his text messages with Plaskett proved particularly controversial as they appeared to show that he influenced the delegate's behavior while she was conducting official business in Congress.Epstein and Plaskett were exchanging messages during disgraced former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen's testimony to the House Oversight Committee in February 2019. At one point, Epstein — who was evidently watching the hearing remotely — alerted Plaskett to Cohen's mention of former Trump executive assistant Rhona Graff and suggested she was the "keeper of the secrets.""RONA??" responded Plaskett. "Quick I’m up next is that an acronym.""Thats [sic] his assistant," said the sex offender.RELATED: Epstein emails SHAME Obama/Clinton ally: Larry Summers quits public life amid calls for Harvard to cut ties Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC). Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty ImagesPlaskett's office characterized the exchange as a politician simply fielding inputs from the public in hopes of getting "at the truth." South Carolina Rep. Ralph Norman (R) and others alternatively recognized Plaskett's apparent efforts to coordinate her line of questioning with Epstein as a form of inappropriate collusion with a convicted sex offender.Norman introduced a House resolution on Tuesday not only to censure and condemn Plaskett but to remove the Democrat from the House Intelligence Committee "for conduct that reflects discreditably on the House of Representatives for colluding with convicted felony sex offender Jeffrey Epstein during a congressional hearing."Censures have become fairly routine in recent years, and it's hardly unprecedented to remove a lawmaker from a committee.For instance, in 2021, 11 nominal Republicans joined with House Democrats to strip Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R) of her committee assignments over comments found to be too incendiary. The same year, Democrats joined then-Republican Reps. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois and Liz Cheney of Wyoming in approving a resolution to censure Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar (R) and strip him of his committee assignments over a provocative social media post.Republicans showed a united front in 2023 when they voted Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) off the Foreign Affairs Committee over her criticism of Israel and perceived lack of objectivity.In addition to noting that Plaskett's relationship with Epstein stands at odds with her carefully constructed public image as a "defender of justice and accountability," Norman's resolution states that:Plaskett's willingness to receive instructions on official congressional proceedings from Epstein, a convicted felony sex offender with deeply concerning international associations, is especially alarming and inappropriate given her own past service in the U.S. Department of Justice and her current role on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and raises serious questions about Delegate Plaskett’s judgment, integrity, and fitness to serve.Plaskett said in her defense on the House floor, "I know how to question individuals. I know how to seek information. I have sought information from confidential informants, from murderers, from other individuals because I want the truth."The House voted 214-209 against censuring Plaskett on Tuesday night.'The American people DO know what happened here!'Joining the 211 Democrats who voted against Norman's resolution were three Republicans: Reps. Don Bacon of Nebraska, Lance Gooden of Texas, and Dave Joyce of Ohio.Another three Republican congressmen voted "present": Andrew Garbarino of New York, Daniel Meuser of Pennsylvania, and Jay Obernolte of California."The House failed to pass my censure of Dem. Stacey Plaskett, a sitting member of Congress who took direction from Epstein in the middle of a 2019 Oversight Committee hearing," Norman said in an X post after the vote. "This is the problem in Washington!! The establishment protects ITSELF, and the American people get pushed ASIDE."Norman added, "What happened to accountability?"Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert (R) similarly expressed revulsion over the failure by some of her peers to hold Plaskett accountable, writing, "Members of the House Intelligence Committee are supposed to be held to the highest standards of integrity, independence, and protection of our nation’s classified information — not communicating with known sexual predators during a committee hearing.""It's disgusting our conference couldn't come together to remove Jeffrey Epstein's puppet off of the Intelligence Committee," continued Boebert. "I'm calling on the Department of Justice to investigate into Delegate Plaskett's relationship with Jeffery [sic] Epstein."Some Republicans have suggested that elements of their party spoiled the vote as part of a deal with Democrats.RELATED: Rep. Cory Mills' legal woes may not be over now that restraining order is granted Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty ImagesRep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) noted on the House floor, "I was wondering if the speaker of the House of Representatives can explain why leadership on both sides, both Democrat and Republican, are cutting back-end deals to cover up public corruption in the House of Representatives for both Democrat and Republican members of Congress."Luna clarified her meaning on X, writing, "The Plaskett censure failed because house leadership exchanged that censure failure for the withdrawal of a vote to censure and refer Cory Mills to house ethics for investigation. The swamp protects itself."Boebert responded, "The American people DO know what happened here!"In retaliation for the effort to censure Plaskett, Congressional Black Caucus Chair Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.) revived her resolution to censure Rep. Cory Mills (R-Fla.) and remove him from the Armed Service Committee on Tuesday. Axios indicated that the revival of the censure resolution made it a "privileged motion" enabling Clarke to bypass the Republican leadership and force a vote.A spokesperson for Mills did not respond to Axios' request for comment.With Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) and possibly other Republicans also willing to vote for the measure, it's unclear whether the vote would have gone in Mills' favor — but Democrats spared him from finding out, moving to withdraw the censure vote after Republicans helped kill the Plaskett censure effort.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

It was one of those perfect Donald Trump social media posts — the kind that seems to straddle the line between truth and fiction, to bend and warp reality and make you ask, “Did he really just hit send on that?""Many in the fake news media have claimed that we will begin denying visas to overweight people," it began, before clarifying: They have even come up with a term for these people, “High Calorie Humans.” This is TOTALLY FALSE. We will not ban all fat people from entering our Great Country, only those whose poor health will overburden our health care system. Visa applicants who are only slightly overweight have nothing to worry about. The bigger ones will need to trim down to get approved. We will EXPAND this rule to cover Expats in the near future.The cherry on top was a closing swipe at one of Trump's favorite celebrity targets, currently in self-imposed exile in the Republic of Ireland: “Rosie, you will never return to This Great Country."The US isn’t the first country in the world to limit entry to fat people. Other weight-watchers include Canada, Australia, and ultra-liberal New Zealand.The phrase "High Calorie Humans" achieved instant "covfefe" status, as fans and haters alike reacted to the latest Trump provocation.Fat shameExcept it was fake — a meme created in response to the very real news that the State Department has added obesity to the list of conditions that could bar foreigners from living in or visiting the U.S.You know you're in the country's head when your constituents do your trolling for you. And you know you've hit a nerve when you dare suggest Americans could lose a few pounds — a form of truth-telling otherwise known as "fat-shaming."But the U.S. is a country in which a Centers for Disease Control survey carried out between 2021 and 2023 found that a staggering 40.3% of adults were obese, with 9.4% having “severe” obesity. That's using the standard metric of BMI, which uses height and weight to estimate body fat. But researchers have proposed including other anthropometric measurements in addition to BMI — such as waist circumference, waist-to-height ratio, and waist-to-hip ratio — for a more accurate assessment of obesity. Using this metric, the proportion of obese Americans could skyrocket to as much as 68.6%.Heavy burdenNo matter how you measure obesity, its direct medical costs are estimated to be some $170 billion a year, a figure that rises to more than $1.4 trillion when you consider the added effects.And that's the burden Trump's new directive hopes to ease. With millions of overweight Americans already straining the country's health care system — and hitting taxpayers where it hurts — the last thing the country needs is to take on more patients from other countries. America already rejects visa applications for those with conditions (like diabetes) that could make them a "public charge" — that is, someone likely to become dependent on government assistance.The new directive builds on previous “public charge” rules, but it’s the first time obesity has been named specifically.The directive applies primarily to immigrant visas — visas that will lead to long-term or even permanent settlement in the U.S. — and not non-immigrant visas (such as H-1B visas) or short-term tourist visas. Fat foreigners will still be able to visit the U.S. and work there. They just won’t be able to settle, unless they lose weight.RELATED: ‘That’s evil!’ Jillian Michaels shocks Glenn Beck with latest Big Food betrayal Blaze MediaWeight-watchersThe U.S. isn’t the first country in the world to limit entry to fat people. Other weight-watchers include Canada, Australia, and ultra-liberal New Zealand.In one well-publicized case from 2009, the Kiwis denied residency to a British nurse who tipped the scales at 134 kg and had a BMI of over 50. A BMI of 25 is considered healthy. Officials estimated that her lifetime costs to the taxpayer could exceed NZ $800,000 or about US $500,000 at the time.Canada and Australia have similar rules in place, but they receive much less attention.Otherwise, though, there aren’t many “anti-fat” laws in effect worldwide. There’s Japan’s “Metabo” law, which came into effect in 2008. It is often described, misleadingly, as some kind of “ban” on fat people per se, but it’s not.Instead, the law imposes an obligation on companies to ensure that workers between ages 40 and 74 receive an annual waistline measurement and help losing weight if they need it. Companies that don’t comply can be fined, but overweight workers themselves are not subject to any form of official punishment. In any case, Japan still has a remarkably low obesity rate, of around 4%.Open borders for hotties?I and other posters in my little corner of X have long called for restrictions of various kinds on overweight people, including proposals to prevent fat people from entering the country, in the name of beauty and the general welfare.One of these proposals was even given the name “open borders for hotties”: If you’re fit and attractive (ideally female), you’re welcome, but if not — no thanks!Critics will moan that Trump’s new rules for “HIGH-CALORIE HUMANS” are unfair and discriminatory, but frankly I can’t think of a policy that’s more in line with the fundamental MAGA principles. Immigration should benefit the nation, not sap its strength and resources. If a massively overweight person comes to the U.S. and the taxpayer has to fork out hundreds of thousands of dollars to cover his medical bills, what’s America First about that?Instead of that fat person, a slim person with discipline and self-control could be brought into the country — or better yet, no immigrant at all. The money would be better spent elsewhere, and there are too many people in the country as it is.The “HIGH-CALORIE HUMANS” rules are a clear sign, for all their apparent absurdity, that President Trump still understands what MAGA is and what it should stand for. Let’s see that understanding applied to immigration policy across the board and most of all to the H-1B visa system, which has been used for decades to disenfranchise and dispossess native workers. High calories, low wages — same difference.

A male entered a 7-Eleven in Oklahoma City just before midnight Thursday and tried to buy burritos, beef sticks, and ice cream with a counterfeit $100 bill, according to a KOKH-TV news video.But the female clerk wasn't buying the con.'You have the right to defend yourself.'What's more, the clerk said she was calling police, KWTV-DT reported — and she refused the male's demand that she give him back the counterfeit bill, Gary Knight of the Oklahoma City Police Department added to the station.Then the thug reportedly got violent.“He came around the counter, got behind the counter where she was, and grabbed her by the throat and began choking her violently," Knight added to KWTV.The clerk — 25-year-old Stephanie Dilyard — told KOKH-TV that "he threatened me, said he was gonna slice my head off, and then that's when I tried to call the police. I realized he started throwing things at me, came behind the counter. I tried to run off, but he grabbed his hands around my neck, and pushed me out of the counter space."Knight added to KWTV that "at some point during this altercation, she pulled out a pistol and shot him." Police said the suspect — who also was carrying a knife — was shot in the stomach and that the entire attack was caught on video, the station noted.The suspect — identified as 59-year-old Kenneth Thompson — fled the store and called 911, KOKH reported.“Reporting he had been shot,” Knight told KWTV. “Although he was not forthcoming with what happened when officers first met with him.”Thompson was arrested at the hospital and charged with assault and battery, threatening acts of violence, attempting to pass a fake bill, and a felony warrant for violating parole, KOKH said.KWTV noted that he'll be transferred to the Oklahoma County Detention Center once he's released from the hospital.As for Dilyard, police told KWTV that she suffered minor injuries and was not arrested; police confirmed to KOKH, in fact, that she's protected under Oklahoma's self-defense law.Yet after all that, 7-Eleven fired Dilyard on Monday for using her gun, KOKH said.RELATED: Family of armed robber outraged that store clerk shot and killed their brother in self-defense: 'Yes, he's robbing them — oh well!' "They said that they were going to separate from employment because of a violation of policy," she added to the station, noting that she had been working alone from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. for more than two years.KOKH said attempts to reach 7-Eleven for a statement on Dilyard's firing and any changes to employee policy were unsuccessful. KWTV said a 7-Eleven clerk stated to the station that employees are not allowed to carry firearms at work. KWTV added that 7-Eleven hasn't responded to its question about whether security will be provided following this attack.Dilyard told KOKH that she'll always choose to preserve her life over preserving her job."This was a situation where I felt like I was put in a corner between choosing between my job and my life, and I'm always going to choose my life because there's people that depend on me," she told the station. "Just, I'm going home, you know. That's my goal. I need to be here for my kids."Dilyard added to KOKH that she hopes her ordeal will be a wake-up call to prevent other clerks, especially women, from being harmed: "If I'd known that, you know, there's a potential where somebody could be for real in taking my life away that I will do whatever it takes ... I hope that ... women see that, and you know, they'll do the same thing. You have the right to defend yourself."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

There is no evidence that the visas meaningfully contribute to American competence or competitiveness.

Department of Education Stripped of Power in a Continued Effort to Dismantle the Failed Agency

Try Not to Get Whiplash During Jamie Raskin's FAST One-Eighty on Epstein When Defending a Dem Colleague

Paid to Hate: CAIR Caught Handing Out $1,000 Checks to Campus Antisemites