The words every parent dreads when a child goes off to college: Mom‚ Dad. My school is on lockdown for an active shooter. Ive told my parents this twice now.Violence has become a regular occurrence in my three years at The Catholic University of America‚ acronymized as CUA.Last week‚ CUA issued a shelter-in-place order because a 14-year-old was shot and killed at the campus Metro station. The arrested suspect was 17.Asocial studies teacher was mugged‚ shot‚ and killed on my campus last July.A large blood stain was left where he died for days afterward‚ a friend who was on campus at the time said.CUA locked down last April because of a swatting scam. This is where a bad actor makes a fake 911 call claiming an active shooter was on campus. Thus‚police SWAT teams are called and respond despite no actual threat.I was in class at the time; classmates volunteered to sit in front of the doors to block them. I amgrateful that it was a false alarm.Screenshot of an email sent by CUA through RAVE on April 13 at 10:10 a.m.Last May‚ in the neighborhood adjacent to campus‚ a man confessed to killing and beheading a handyman.In freshman year‚ I saw gang violence firsthand. Waiting for a Metro train at the campus station‚ I saw two men beating each other until one jumped on a train. The others face was dripping in blood from what seemed like a broken nose. He called someone on a cellphone and screamed about needing a ski mask so peoplewouldntrecognize him.The Catholic University of America sends alerts to the student body whenevera crime is reported in the area surrounding campus. To the credit of CUA‚ it updates students as much as possible. That said‚ I see that muggings‚ carjackings‚ shootings‚ and other violent crimes occur mere blocks away from my dorm almost weekly.My school is in Washington‚ D.C. In a city with such strict gun laws‚ you would expect safer streets. You cant open carry a firearm in the District of Columbia; the city requires universal background checks and bans assault weapons. The elected government of the nations capital doesnt support the castle doctrine of a persons right to defend his own home. In D.C.‚ there is a duty to retreat.If the citys gun laws are working‚ how is it that I have had to hide twice because of active shooters?Crime in the District has been on the rise. I wrote about it last year for my school newspaper. Violent crime jumped 23% from February 2022 to February 2023. Assaults‚ muggings‚ and carjackings have gone up. The increase in carjackings last year prompted D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser‚ a Democrat‚ to give out steering-wheel locks.Leftist billionaire financier George Soros is known for trying to transform Americas criminal justice system by contributing big money to the campaigns of soft-on-crime candidates for district attorney across the country. Once elected‚ these liberal DAs have trumped the efforts of so-called diversity‚ equity‚ and inclusion‚ or DEI. However‚ such efforts come at a serious cost to students like me. Our safety is the price for their progressive policies.Violent criminals across the country are receiving reduced sentences if convicted or arent being charged at all.Recently it was discovered that major cities such as New York‚ Chicago‚ and Los Angeles failed to submit crime data to the FBI. An op-ed published in the Washington Examiner and co-written by former Assistant FBI Director Mark Morgan contends that the FBI erred in counting violent crimes. The bureau claims that crime in major cities has gone down‚ when in fact it has gone up over the past five years.An organization cited in the op-ed‚ the Major Cities Chiefs Association‚ which collects police data‚ says homicides in major cities have gone up 23%. The Council on Criminal Justice‚ a similar organization‚ estimates that homicide is up 18% and violent crime in general is up 8%.Matthew Graves‚ the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia‚ serves as the local prosecutor in the nations capital. An appointee of President JoeBiden‚ Gravesis embroiled in a case stemming from the Capitol riot on Jan. 6‚ 2021‚ that has caused scandal and division throughout the country.Am I supposed to trust that Graves will be tough on crime when it opposes his woke ideals? Am I supposed to trust that he will keep me safe?Right now‚ thousands of parents are preparing their children for college‚ buying mattress toppers‚ laptops‚ and red solo cups. However‚ the reality is that many students‚ especially females‚ also will purchase personal alarms and pepper spray. Why is this our reality? It is mostly our own fault. We choose our leaders. The government enforces the law only through the consent of the governed. This is good news‚ though; the political reality is in our hands. We need to call out lawmakers who are soft on crime‚ take civic action‚ and stop sitting passively while students of any age are forced to face the underbelly of our nations cities. Only when we stand up against the woke mob will our cities become safer.The post I Go to College in DC. Why Is It So Unsafe Here? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Progressives are using legal loopholes and the power of the federal government to maximize Democrat votes in the 2024 election at taxpayers expense‚ RealClearInvestigations has found.The methods include voter registration and mobilization campaigns by ostensibly nonpartisan charities that target Democrats using demographic data as proxies‚ and the Biden administrations unprecedenteddemandthat every federal agency consider ways to expand citizens opportunities to register to vote and to obtain information about‚ and participate in‚ the electoral process.A dizzying array of overwhelmingly democracy-focused entities with ties to the Democratic Party operating as charities and funded with hundreds of millions of dollars from major liberal dark money vehicles are engaged in a sprawling campaign to register the voters‚ deliver them the ballots‚ and figuratively and sometimes literally harvest the votes necessary to defeat Donald Trump.These efforts‚ now buttressed by the federal government‚ amplify and extend what Time magazinedescribed as a well-funded cabal of powerful people ranging across industries and ideologies‚ who had worked behind the scenes in 2020 to influence perceptions‚ change rules and laws‚ steer media coverage and control the flow of information to defeat Trump and other Republicans. The shadow campaigners‚ Time declared‚ were not rigging the election; they were fortifying it.Heading into 2024‚ there is not a shadow campaign‚ said Mike Howell‚ executive director of The Heritage Foundations Oversight Project. There is an overt assault on President Trump and those who wish to vote for him occurring at every level of government and with the support of all major institutions. (The Daily Signal is the news organization of The Heritage Foundation.)By contrast‚ Republican Party stalwarts lament that no comparable effort exists on their side. The GOPs turnout and messaging efforts seek to thread a difficult needle by encouraging early and absentee voting and ballot-harvestingpandemic-era measures that Trump and supporters blame for his 2020 electoral defeatwhile the party simultaneously fights the mainly blue-state laws that made the practices possible. The partys position is further complicated by its standard-bearers warnings of a rigged election bigger than in 2020‚ which somespeculatecould turn off moderate swing voters.Electioneering Super-WeaponsTheIRSpermitstax-exempt nonprofit groups to engage in voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives so long as they do not refer to any candidate or political party nor conduct their activities in a biased manner that favors (or opposes) one or more candidates prohibited.These entities have become magnets for funds not only from wealthy donors‚ who can contribute without traditional campaign finance limitsand get a tax break to bootbut also abundantly endowed private foundations that are prohibited from engaging in partisan activities.In recent years‚ dozens of progressive-oriented 501(c)(3)s‚ now pulling in upward of $500 million annually‚ have engaged in purportedly neutral efforts to impact elections‚ according toHayden Ludwig‚ director of policy research at the election integrity-focused advocacy group Restoration of America.In practice‚ critics like Ludwig argue‚ left-leaning charities flout the law by registering and mobilizing demographics that tend to vote disproportionately Democratic behind a veil of nonpartisan democracy promotion.During the 2020 election‚ for example‚ the Voter Participation Center solicited millions of ballot applications in swing statesmany of them prefilled for respondents. This nonprofit‚ like its peers‚ is clear that it isnt targeting just any voters‚ but whatitand progressiveactivistshave dubbed a New American Majority of young people‚ people of color and unmarried women.Tom Lopach‚ a longtime Democratic Party operative and the centers president and CEO‚ told RealClearInvestigations in a statement: We do the work that state election officials typically do not doseeking out underrepresented voting-eligible Americans This is difficult but necessary work that brings democracy to eligible Americans doorsteps.In 2020‚ Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan showed how supposedly neutral efforts can have a partisan impact when they funneled some $400 million through twoprogressiveledbut purportedly nonpartisan nonprofits intoelection officesacross the country.That moneydisproportionately wentto jurisdictions that Joe Biden won in the pivotal battleground states that delivered his victory‚ often flowing to left-leaning nonprofits to whom election offices outsourced the administration ofsometimes critical functions.In April 2022‚ a primary conduit of these so-called Zuckerbucks‚ the Center for Tech and Civic Life‚ announced the launch of a successor to the 2020 effortthe U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence‚ a five-year $80 million program to envision‚ support‚ and celebrate excellence in U.S. election administration.The left has assembled an impressive election-industrial complex of nonprofit organizations that is constantly working towards goals like promoting participation targeting underrepresented minorities‚ said Jason Snead‚ executive director of the conservative Honest Elections Project. Such terms‚ Snead says‚ are code for identifying and mobilizing liberal voters.Election experts view such activities as potentially decisive.Nonpartisan and charitable voter registration and get-out-the-vote groups are the Democratic Partys electioneering super-weapon[s]‚ said Parker Thayer‚ an analyst with theconservative-orientedCapital Research Center in Washington‚ D.C.Everybody Votesbut for Whom?Of these‚ Thayer sees the Everybody Votes Campaign as ofparamount importance.Born of a plan commissioned by [Hillary] Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta‚ funded by the Democratic Partys biggest donors‚ and coordinated with cut-throat Democratic consultants‚ Thayer writes in an extensiveanalysisof the groups efforts‚ the Everybody Votes campaign [has] used the guise of civic-minded charity to selectively register millions of non-white swing-state voters in the hopes of getting out the Democratic vote.It does so by funding and training over 50 community groups to register voters toclosethe voter registration gap in communities of color‚ which it attributes to modern forms of Jim Crow laws‚ such as voter ID requirements‚ the groups executive director‚ Nellie Sires‚ said in a January 2024interview.From 2016-2021‚ the Everybody Votes Campaign‚ doing business as three entities‚ collected over$190 millionfrom major Democratic Party donors‚ unions‚ and environmental activists. Some of thelargest donorsinclude the League of Conservation Voters Education Fund; the New Venture and Hopewell funds‚ managed by for-profit consulting firm Arabella Advisors; and the George Soros-funded Foundation to Promote Open Societyall 501(c)(3) public charities or private foundationsforbiddenfrom supporting voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias.The Everybody Votes Campaign distributed the funds to a slew ofleft-leaning state-based voter registration organizationslargely in eight pivotal states from 2016 to 2019Arizona‚ Colorado‚ Florida‚ Georgia‚ Ohio‚ North Carolina‚ Virginia‚ and Nevadaand then to Pennsylvania‚ Michigan‚ and Wisconsin in 2021.According to Thayersanalysis‚ the Everybody Votes Campaigns voter registration push would have provided Democrats more votes than the total margins of victory in Arizona‚ Georgia‚ Nevada‚ and Pennsylvania‚ securing Bidens victory in the 2020 election.4 to 10 Times More Cost-EffectiveOne notable backer of the Everybody Votes Campaign is Mind the Gap‚ a Moneyball-style Silicon Valley Democratic super PAC founded by Stanford law professor Barbara Fried‚ andconnectedto the political activities of her convicted crypto-fraudster son‚ Sam Bankman-Fried.The analytics-focusedoutfitprepared a confidential strategy memoleakedin advance of the 2020 election‚ noting that 501(c)(3) voter registration focused on underrepresented groups in the electorate would be the single most effective tactic for ensuring Democratic victories4 to 10 times more cost-effective on after-tax basis at garnering additional Democratic votes relative to alternatives like broadcast media and digital buys.Mind the Gap recommended that donors contribute to three organizations: the Voter Participation Center and its sister organization‚ the Center for Voter Information for mail-based registration efforts‚ and Everybody Votes for site-based registration efforts.The largest grant recipient‚ receiving $24 million during the 2016-2021 period‚ wasState Voices‚ which describes itself as a nonpartisan network of 25 state-based coalitions that collectively partner with over 1‚200 organizations consisting of advocates‚ organizers‚ and activists work[ing] together to fight for a healthy democracy and political power for Black‚ Indigenous‚ Latinx‚ Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI)‚ and all people of color (BIPOC).Another top recipient‚ raking in over $10 million‚ was the Voter Participation Center.According to the Capital Research Center‚ the Everybody Votes Campaign wouldcollectand spend over $50 million in connection with the 2022 midterm electionsthe most recent period for which financials are available. All told‚ since its founding in 2015‚the campaign says‚its network has registered 5.1 million voters‚ of whom 76% are people of color; 56% are women; and 47% are under the age of 35.Last November‚ the news outlet Puckreportedon a secret memo circulated by Mind the Gap regarding its plans for 2024. Our strategy early in the 2024 presidential race will be to massively scale high-performing voter registration and mobilization programs‚ the memo read. The PAC again specifically directed donors to the Everybody Votes Campaign‚ which did not respond to requests for comment.Lopach‚ who has worked in Democratic Party politics his entire career‚ bristled at RealClearInvestigations questions regarding critics claims of a partisan bent to its work. The presumptions baked into the questions emailed to us are inaccurate and reveal the reporters own biases‚ he responded‚ while emphasizing the organizations targeting of underrepresented voting-eligible Americans.Thayer has dubbed Everybody Votes the largest and most corrupt charitable voter registration drive in American history.Of such organizations claims of nonpartisanship‚ Howell told RealClearInvestigations: If they were truly interested in an informed participatory constitutional Republic‚ they would have an even-handed approach to registering voters.Call me when they show up to a NASCAR race‚ Daughters of the American Revolution event‚ or a gun show‚ Howell added. Then we can pretend for a minute that these are beyond just facial efforts to appear somewhat neutral.Challenges for GOPBut NASCAR races have not been hubs for GOP-led voter registration efforts either. Restoration of Americas Ludwig estimates that the Right may spend as little as 1% of what the Left spends on voter registration efforts.A recentmemofrom the Sentinel Action Fund‚ a super PAC that aims to elect conservatives‚ noted that in the 2022 election cycle‚ while $8.9 billion was spent on federal elections‚ there were zero large independent expenditure organizations on the Right focused on get-out-the-vote efforts or ballot chasing.Republican Partyvehiclesand conservative outfits like grassroots-orientedTurning Point Action‚ a 501(c)(4)‚ are engaged in such efforts in the 2024 cycle‚ but the scale and sophistication of their political counterparts efforts would appear unrivaled at this point.Election experts attribute this gap to several factors beyond the GOPs focus on other tactics to win elections‚ or ineffectiveness. They note that Democratic voters tend to be more concentrated in urban areas and college campuses‚ making it easier to run efficient registration drives. As regards early and absentee voting and ballot harvesting‚ it is not clear if these efforts will substantially grow the pool of Republican voters versus merely enabling the party to bank votes earlier.With respect to the use of 501(c)(3)s to conduct such activities‚ Ludwig said some conservatives may still be fearful of running afoul of the IRSthrough exploiting tax laws to pursue efforts perceived to be partisan effectively on the taxpayers dimein the wake of itstargetingof tea party groups for extreme scrutiny during the Obama years.Bidenbucks: Zuckerbucks on SteroidsSince the 2020 election‚ Democrats have opened a second apparent electioneering front that Republicans could not match even if they wanted to: The rise of so-called Bidenbucks‚ which uses the unlimited funding‚ resources‚ and reach of the federal government and agency offices located nationwide to turn out favored voters‚ according to Stewart Whitson‚ legal director of the conservative Foundation for Government Accountability.In March 2021‚ President Joe Biden introducedExecutive Order 14019. The directive on promoting access to voting orders every federal agency‚ more than 600 in all‚ to register and mobilize votersparticularly people of color and others the White House says face challenges to exercise their fundamental right to vote. It further directs the agencies to collaborate with ostensibly nonpartisan nonprofits in pursuit of its goals.As RealClearInvestigations haspreviously reported‚ Executive Order 14019 appears to have been designed by left-leaning think tank Demos and implemented in consultation and sometimes coordination with a slew of progressive‚ labor‚ and identity-focused groups with the goal of generating up to 3.5 million new or updated voter registrations annually.The ACLU and Demos havereportedlyhelped execute the order. RealClearInvestigations additionally found that at least two recipients of grants under the Everybody Votes Campaign‚ the NAACP and UnidosUSformerly the National Council of Razawere also listed on anemailas participants in a July 2021 listening session on the executive order convened by the White House and agency officials.Whitson‚ whose organization unearthed that email in its fight to expose details about the order‚ emphasized that [U]nlike 2020 wherein the shadow campaign was conducted by private citizens seeking to influence government election operations from the outside‚ the threat we face in 2024 is being launched fromwithinthe government itself.Facing both congressional scrutiny and litigation‚ the administration has closely guarded the strategic plans agencies were to develop to carry out the order‚ how they are implementing them‚ to what end‚ and with whom.Perfunctory press releases‚ reports from groups supportive of the order‚ and documents slowly ferreted out via Freedom of Information Act requests and litigation‚ however‚ demonstrate that relevant agencies have sought to drive voter registration via public housing authorities‚ child nutrition programs‚ and voluntary tax preparation clinics.In August 2023‚ U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services issuedupdated guidancecalling for the agency to register voters at naturalization ceremonies.More recently‚ the Department of Education did thesame‚ blessing the use of federal work-study funds to pay students for supporting broad-based get-out-the-vote activities‚ voter registration‚ and other activities. Scott Walter‚ president of the Capital Research Center‚ recently told The Epoch Times that the department had previouslythreatenedschools that you better be registering students or you could lose your federal funds.When asked by RealClearInvestigations to respond to Walters claim‚ the Department of Education would not. Over two dozen Pennsylvania state legislatorschallengedthe order via a lawsuit in January. Citing alleged unlawful attempts by several agencies to register Keystone State voters‚ the lawmakers asserted:By engaging in a targeted voter registration effort of this magnitude‚ focused specifically on these agencies and the groups of potential voters they interact with‚ leveraging the resources and reach of the federal government‚ this effort appears to be a taxpayer-funded get-out-the-vote effort designed to benefit the current Presidents political party.Echoing this view‚ Whitsons Foundation for Government Accountability submitted anamicus briefnoting that all of the federal agencies FGA has identified as taking active steps to carry out EO 14019 have one thing in common: They provide government welfare benefits and other services to groups of voters the vast majority of which have historically voted Democrat.The plaintiffs alleged the executive order violated both Pennsylvania law limiting voter registration efforts to non-federal actors and constitutional provisions reserving election laws to the states. On March 26‚ a district court dismissed the case‚ claiming the plaintiffs lacked standing. Whitson told RealClearInvestigations that others would likely lodge similar lawsuits‚ building on the Pennsylvania legislators case in the wake of the dismissal. Days later‚ The Federalistreportedthat the plaintiffs intended to appeal their case to the U.S. Supreme Court. A White House spokesperson did not reply to RealClearInvestigations inquiries regarding the executive order.Opposition and CircumventionRepublicans have had more success opposing the use of Zuckerbucks and other private monies used to finance public elections. More thantwo dozen stateswould move toban or restrictsuch grants in response to the activities observed during the 2020 election.Most recently‚ Wisconsin‚ where some of the mostcontroversialZuckerbucks-relatedeffortstook place‚ was added to that list when‚ on April 2‚ voters approved a constitutional amendment barring the private funding of elections.Despite this crackdown and the feds seemingly stepping into the breach‚ efforts to privately finance election administration persist. The U.S. Alliance for Election Excellencebills itselfas an initiative to bolster woefully unsupported election offices to revitalize American democracy.The organizationsaysit services jurisdictions11 listed on its website‚ ranging across states from Arizona to California and Wisconsinwith training‚ mentorship‚ and resources. Alliance officials did not respond to RealClearInvestigations inquiry about whether it would be terminating the relationship with the city of Madison‚ Wisconsin‚ in light of the passage of the recent ballot measure that would seem to have barred it. Nor did it respond to RealClearInvestigation other inquiries in connection with this article.Most of these partnerships were initiated with jurisdictions in states that have not banned Zuckerbucks‚ though it has sought tocircumventsuch prohibitions in Georgia and Utah. The stated goal of the Alliance for Election Excellence is to support voters via measures like assisting participating centers in redesigning forms to make them more intuitive and purchasing infrastructure to improve election security and accessibility.Alliance launch partners include entities such as:The Center for Civic Design‚ which works with election offices using research‚ design‚ accessibility‚ and plain language to remove barriers in the voter journey and invite participation in democracy.The Elections Group‚ to implement new programs or improve processes for voters and stakeholders.The Center for Secure and Modern Elections to modernize the voting system‚ making elections more efficient and secure.Critics argue this seemingly more modest effort is‚ in reality‚ an ambitious Zuckerbucks rebrand.Sneads Honest Elections Project published areportin April 2023‚ based in part on documents received from FOIA requests‚ indicating that the Alliance is a reinvention of CTCLs scheme to use private funding to strongarm election policy nationwide.Among other takeaways‚ it found that:The alliance offers services that touch every aspect of election administration‚ ranging from legal and political consultation to public relations‚ guidance‚ and assistance with recruitment and training.The alliance is gathering detailed information on the inner workings of participating election offices and developing improvement plans to reshape the way they operate.The report shows that many of the alliances launch partners‚ starting with the Center for Tech and Civic Life and the Center for Civic Design‚ are funded by major Democrat-tied‚ so-called dark money groups such as the Democracy Fund and Arabella Advisors New Venture Fund and Hopewell Fund.The Democracy Fund is led by Democrat tech billionaire Pierre Omidyar‚ which has granted some $275 million to like-minded organizations from publications like Mother Jones and ProPublica to the Voter Registration Project since its founding.The District of Columbia recentlyclosed a criminal investigationintoArabella‚ whose fund networkreportedlyspent nearly $1.2 billion in 2020 alone‚ after probing it over allegations itsfundswere pursuing political ends in violation of their tax-exempt statuses. The Center for Secure and Modern Elections‚ the Honest Elections Project says‚ pushes left-wing priorities like automatic voter registration and is run by the New Venture Fund. The Elections Groups CEO and co-founder‚ Jennifer Morrell‚ previously served as a consultant at the Democracy Fund.The Capital Research Centers Walter uses a football analogy to explain why he sees these efforts as untoward. He told RealClearInvestigations:Election offices are the refs in elections; the parties are teams trying to score. Youd be puzzled if you heard Super Bowl refs say theyre trying to boost points scored. Youd be outraged if you learned those refs had received money and training from people who previously worked for one teams offensive coaching staff. Thats what left-wing political operatives‚ using left-wing money‚ are doing‚ and its clearly unfair.Non-Trump LawfareDemocrat-aligned groups continue to engage in litigation‚ like that brought by chief election lawyer Marc Elias‚ aimed at loosening election laws to their benefit. Snead told RealClearInvestigations‚ There are more than 70 active lawsuits right now targeting voter ID laws‚ anti-ballot harvesting laws‚ signature verification‚ drop box regulations‚ and more.After securing victory in a lawsuit requiring signature verification for mail voting in Pennsylvania‚ the Republican National Committee touted its engagement as well in 81 election integrity cases this cycle. Swing-state Wisconsin is another major battleground for such efforts.There‚ Elias legal team has challenged witness signature requirements and bans on election clerks filling address information on mail-in ballots. It and others are alsoworkingto overturn a state Supreme Court decision finding drop boxes illegal. The Badger States now liberal-majority Supreme Court announced in March it would take up the case.Cutting against these efforts are not only the states citizen-approved Zuckerbucks ban‚ but another Badger-passed April 2ballot measureamending the states constitution to prohibit those other than an election official designated by law from carrying out election-related tasks.Watchdogs like Howell are concerned that left-leaning electioneers and lawfare forces collectively are pursuing an election dis-integrity strategy to greatly expand the universe of ballots while limiting any ability to ensure that they are fairly cast and counted.Its a basic recipe for fraud.Eliassaysthose seeking to combat such efforts are engaged in voter suppression and election subversion.Democrats also have the federal government working on their side on the litigation frontand in ways extending beyond the veritable lawfare barrage the Biden Justice Department has leveled at Trump.Speaking in Selma‚ Alabama‚ on the 59thanniversary of Bloody Sunday‚ the 1965 police assault on civil rights marchers‚ Attorney General Merrick Garlanddeclaredthat the right to vote is still under attack.Garland vowed the Department of Justice was punching back‚ including challenging efforts by states and jurisdictions to implement discriminatory‚ burdensome‚ and unnecessary restrictions on access to the ballot‚ including those related to mail-in voting‚ the use of drop boxes‚ and voter ID requirements.This article was originally published by RealClearInvestigations and made available via RealClearWire.The post How Taxpayers Will Heavily Subsidize Democrat Boots on the Ground This Election appeared first on The Daily Signal.

When (Tr)antifa Bombs‚ the Silence Is Deafening

US Intelligence: China is Providing Equipment to Support Russia';s War Effort

A watchdog group obtained internal records showing federal agencies collaborating with private partners to crush online free speech before the 2020 election.Protect the Publics Trust‚ a government watchdog‚ obtained never-before-seen emails that expose the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) advising the State Departments Global Engagement Center (GEC) on censorship collusion with Big Tech companies. Notably‚ one email came the same day as a bombshell New York Postreport on Hunter Bidens infamous laptop. MRC Free Speech America has reviewed the emails‚ which were initially reported by the Washington Examiner.The researchers of the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) had worked with DHSs Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) before the 2020 election and DHS recommended them to another major federal agency for censorship purposes.Both EIP and CISA representatives have tried to downplay their partnership and anti-free speech work amidst GOP Congressional scrutiny‚ the Examiner explained. However‚ the newly discovered emails appear to suggest a close working relationship.Protect the Publics Trust Director Michael Chamberlain raised the alarm about the implications of such emails in an exclusive interview with MRC Free Speech America. The more people dig into the Censorship Industrial Complex‚ the more federal agencies denials‚ disavowals‚ and defenses crumble. Agencies and offices that claim to never have been involved have left fingerprints all over the records we find.EIP involved GEC‚ the University of Washington and the Stanford Internet Observatory. The new documentation comes soon after a 60 Minutes segment featured University of Washington researcher Kate Starbird claiming government and private entities had not colluded to pressure Big Tech into censoring content. The emails directly contradict Starbirds claims.In his remarks to MRC‚ Chamberlain added‚ Called out‚ they proclaim their efforts never focused on the speech of American citizens‚ yet there is overlap and evidence of close coordination between agencies involved in domestic matters and those involved in foreign policy‚ even helping each other make contacts and connections.In the unearthed emails‚ GEC reached out to EIP. Our colleagues at the Department of Homeland Security/CISA recommended we talk to you about your current efforts to protect the 2020 elections from foreign interference‚ then-GEC academic Adela Levis reportedly wrote in Oct. 2020. There may be some synergies there with the work were doing. Warm regards‚ Adela.The reply specifically highlighted Starbirds leadership and government agencies anti-free speech efforts. GEC ended by being involved in the process of flagging content for social media to censor‚ the Washington Examiner reported. EIP Team‚ I want to send my sincerest thanks for allowing me to participate in the Election Integrity Partnership as an analyst with the GEC‚ enthused State Department employee William Beebe in December 2020.The same day GEC started working toward election interfering censorship‚ the New York Post story Smoking-gun email reveals how Hunter Biden introduced Ukrainian businessman to VP dad was published‚ the Examiner reported. MRC poll data previously illustrated that censorship of Hunter Biden scandals swayed the 2020 election in Joe Bidens favor.Emphasizing the election interference‚ Chamberlain told MRC: Coincidence of coincidences‚ a State Department agency attempted to connect on the very day the Hunter Biden laptop story broke‚ one of the most egregious examples of a story being improperly dismissed and censored as foreign disinformation.MRC Free Speech America Assistant Editor Luis Cornelio contributed to this report.Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency‚ clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored‚ contact us using CensorTracks contact form‚ and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

On Tuesday‚ National Public Radio business editor Uri Berliner blew the whistle on the stations assembly line of liberally biased reporting‚ which he said was being cranked out one story after another framed with the leftist worldview. The expose put NPR under the microscope and put a serious blemish on the organization. But the question now is: will that blemish finally force media-scoring agency NewsGuard to downgrade NPRs perfect 100/100 rating?In his essay entitled Ive Been at NPR for 25 Years. Heres How We Lost Americas Trust‚ Berliner explained: Theres an unspoken consensus about the stories we should pursue and how they should be framed. Its frictionlessone story after another about instances of supposed racism‚ transphobia‚ signs of the climate apocalypse‚ Israel doing something bad‚ and the dire threat of Republican policies. Its almost like an assembly line.Berliner appeared on NewsNation with host Chris Cuomo Tuesday night and described the current company culture as a much narrower kind of niche thinking‚ a group think that';s really clustered around various selective progressive views that dont they don';t allow enough air and enough spaciousness to consider all kinds of perspectives.That certainly didnt sound like the type of environment that would be conducive to fair‚ objective‚ and unbiased reporting. Especially if their default framing for reporting was that Republican policies were considered a dire threat to the country. But as of the publication of this piece‚ NewsGuard still had NPR rated at perfect 100/100.As MRC Associate Editor for Business &;amp; Free Speech America Joseph Vazquez recently reported‚ NewsGuard can reluctantly downgrade legacy liberal media outlets when they have terrible reporting held up under their nose.NewsGuard was seemingly forced to recently downgrade The New York Timesfrom a perfect 100 to 87.5/100 after the Media Research Center repeatedly called out The Times shoddy reporting and NewsGuards refusal to act on it.As Vazquez noted in the 2023 study of NewsGuards rankings‚ the point of the whole system was for it to be used as a cudgel against right-leaning news organizations:NewsGuard wields itsratings as a cudgel‚ attempting toscare awayadvertisers from doing business with media and organizations that have been accused of promoting so-called misinformation or wrongthink on a whole host of issues like abortion‚ climate change‚ COVID-19 and elections. In so doing‚ NewsGuard effectively strips media outlets with which it disagrees of their ad money‚ slowly bleeding out their coffers.This time‚ the calls were coming from inside the preverbal house with a 25-year NPR veteran being the one to cry foul.Berliner also told Cuomo he was getting while not public internal support from some of his NPR colleagues. And a recent Times article noted Berliner was getting backup from former NPR ombudsman Jeffrey A. Dvorkin.The article also reported that internal pushback to Berliner rejected calls for ideological diversity in the newsroom: In one group‚ several staff members disputed Mr. Berliners points about a lack of ideological diversity and said efforts to recruit more people of color would make NPRs journalism better.Clearly‚ NPR was not deserving of a 100/100 rating. So‚ how will NewsGuard react?

A radical proponent of censorship received the opportunity to advise Congress on Big Tech and liability. She told Congress that protections for social media platforms should depend on their willingness to remove content.Dr. Mary Anne Franks‚ the author of the Cult of the Constitution‚ Our Deadly Devotion to Guns and Free Speech‚ repeatedly advised members of Congress that tech platforms should be stripped of liability protections if they do not remove content she does not approve of. During an April 11 Communications and Technology Subcommittee hearing‚ Franks lamented: While some groups may be enjoying free speech under the Section 230 status quo‚ especially billionaires‚ white supremacists‚ conspiracy mongers‚ this freedom is not shared equally across society. No free speech advocates were invited as witnesses to counter her radical views.In response to a question from Rep. Lizzie Fletcher (D-TX)‚ Franks offered a disturbing answer‚ saying that a social media platforms immunity should be dependent on its approach to harmful content. Franks claimed‚ There needs to be a limitation on this kind of immunity‚ if its going to be given at all‚ under C1‚ its got to be given to those kind of social media companies and platforms that are not soliciting‚ encouraging or profiting from or being deliberately indifferent to what they know is harmful content. [Emphasis added]Franks repeated this point to Rep. Robin Kelly (D-IL)‚ adding‚ You cannot be profiting from harmful content and I think it also means you cannot be an indifferent bystander.During the hearing‚ Franks did not list what she considers harmful content. However‚ she has a long track record of statements and publications demonstrating her opposition to free speech. Franks not only wrote the Cult of the Constitution but also submitted a letter to the House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack titled Social Media and the Weaponization of Free Speech.According to Jonathan Turley‚ a Fox News contributor and George Washington University Law School professor‚ Franks wants to gut the First and Second Amendments to the Constitution. Turley cited Franks rewrite of the First Amendment to prioritize equity over freedom of speech as well as her wholesale replacement of the right to bear arms with a right to abortion.Here is her proposal for an improved First Amendment in full:Every person has the right to freedom of expression‚ association‚ peaceful assembly‚ and petition of the government for redress of grievances‚ consistent with the rights of others to the same and subject to responsibility for abuses. All conflicts of such rights shall be resolved in accordance with the principle of equality and dignity of all persons. Both the freedom of religion and the freedom from religion shall be respected by the government. The government may not single out any religion for interference or endorsement‚ nor may it force any person to accept or adhere to any religious belief or practice. [EMPHASIS ADDED]Subcommittee on Communications and Technology‚ here is your expert witness.Conservatives are under attack! Contact your representatives and demand Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency on WEF partnerships‚ clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored‚ contact us at the Media Research Center contact form‚ and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Is it really that hard to be a photographer? Maybe this is just the resentment of someone who gets paid by the word‚ but to me‚ it looks like all you have to do is point and shoot. Compared to that‚ I';m digging ditches over here. Had Garland spent his $50 million budget on making the kind of libtard‚ death-to-muh-democracy fever dream that';s been stupefying half of the country since 2016‚ he would';ve had a ";Battlefield Earth";-level camp classic on his hands. The protagonists of Alex Garland';s new movie‚ ";Civil War‚"; aren';t just professional photographers: they';re war correspondents. This means they point their cameras at people getting shot or burned alive or blown up or picking a battered teddy bear out of the rubble. In this case‚ they don';t have to look for the action in some far-flung ";s**thole"; (as Nick Offerman';s subdued but obviously Trump-inspired president/dictator would call it). It';s going down right in their backyard.We first meet veteran photojournalist Lee (Kirsten Dunst) and her Reuters colleague Joel (Wagner Moura) in a slightly more dysfunctional version of New York City‚ now held by the forces opposing the three-term‚ FBI-disbanding fascist in chief.Confusingly‚ it';s also mentioned that Offerman';s character has a penchant for ordering air strikes on American citizens‚ which seems like more of an Obama thing. I suppose the British writer-director can';t be expected to know all our folkways.Lee and Joel narrowly escape death at the hands of an adorable‚ corn-fed suicide bomber carrying an American flag. In the commotion‚ Lee reluctantly helps clueless newbie photographer Jessie‚ who ends up tagging along with the duo as does their rotund old friend from ";what';s left of the ';New York Times.';"; Ouch. At least they didn';t label it ";failing."; This opening scene establishes that war photography is on the one hand harder than regular photography‚ in that you too can get shot‚ burnt alive‚ etc.‚ just like those poor saps you';re covering. You might even end up in one of your competitor';s haunting‚ potentially prize-winning photos. On the other hand‚ it';s photography on easy mode: reality does most of the work for you. And soaking up all that human suffering gives you a world-weary gravity you don';t find in the average paparazzo. Sure‚ getting hanged by your thumbs from a tree branch and whacked like a flesh-covered pinata because you stole some beef jerky for your kids is tough‚ but have you tried ";bearing witness"; to it?";That';s the job‚"; as countless battle-scarred shutterbug movie characters have told their naive‚ young‚ dewy-eyed protgs and as the battle-scarred protagonist of ";Civil War"; tells her naive‚ young‚ dewy-eyed protg.All the shop talk makes sense‚ as ";Civil War"; is at heart a workplace drama. Dunst and her companions have one goal: get to Washington‚ D.C.‚ to score an interview with the embattled leader before the ";Western forces"; overrun the White House and end the war. Despite their job-related stress‚ Dunst and co. don';t seem to have any skin in the game. No spouses or kids. No loved ones on opposite sides. The regular people they meet along the way the soldiers fighting for their lives or the refugee families we see fleeing with their worldly possessions in a shopping cart do. Unsurprisingly‚ they don';t seem to care whether or not our intrepid professionals achieve their career goals. Neither‚ after a while‚ does the viewer. It';s all very effectively done: harrowing urban combat‚ menacing rednecks with ";assault rifles‚"; real-life Dunst-hubby Jesse Plemon in those red sharpshooter shades. If the point is ";war is hell‚"; consider it made. Although‚ there';s nothing here Steven Spielberg didn';t do better 25 years ago in ";Saving Private Ryan."; And that better be the point‚ as the movie has nothing to say about our current political divisions. Take away the burned-out shopping malls and the assault on the Lincoln Memorial‚ and the ";Civil War"; might as well take place in Bagdad or Odessa.Had Garland spent his $50 million budget on making the kind of libtard‚ death-to-muh-democracy fever dream that';s been stupefying half of the country since 2016‚ he would';ve had a ";Battlefield Earth";-level camp classic on his hands. The ragtag squad of trans lesbians pinned down in a ruined Victoria';s Secret by the remnants of the 103rd Hot Gun Girl brigade. The MAGA uncle Thanksgiving table siege. And introducing Keith Olbermann (as himself)‚ killing a Proud Boy with his own tiki torch.";What';s so civil about civil war?"; a great American once asked. Garland';s violent yet timid movie is a kind of answer. It';s rarely so crass as to reveal the liberal assumptions beneath its polite veneer of impartiality. It produces a few arresting images without ever providing much-needed context. It waxes lyrical about moral ambiguity while refusing to consider the political nature of its own most cherished assumptions. Could it happen here? Garland and his crew have sufficient skill to make it seem plausible. But why would it happen? What kind of passions could prompt everyday Americans to turn on their neighbors and tear apart the country they all love? If ";Civil War"; has any theories‚ it lacks the courage to state them.Come to think of it‚ it makes perfect sense that we';re forced to experience this cataclysm solely through the eyes of our once proud fourth estate. Their journey through a divided America is just as maddeningly obtuse and incurious as anything you';d see on CNN.

A San Antonio‚ Texas‚ homeowner said he opened fire after robbers who were stealing from his SUV in his driveway last month shot at him during their getaway.What are the details?Police said two young males holding guns burglarized a vehicle in the 8900 block of Rue De Lis Street around midnight March 8. Police released video of the incident Thursday. Image source: YouTube screenshotEvelio Soto and his family were headed to bed at the time‚ and Soto told KENS-TV that his wife saw on her phone two people approaching their home.Police said one male entered the car and took a box of ammunition from the vehicle while the other male served as a lookout. A KENS video report indicates that the vehicle was unlocked.Soto told KENS he was concerned they were going to break into his home‚ so he got out of bed and grabbed his gun.He noted to the station that he headed down the stairs‚ opened the front door‚ and saw a person inside his SUV become frightened.Soto added to KENS that the suspect ran off down the driveway and into a ";getaway"; vehicle. Image source: YouTube screenshot He added to the station that the lookout fired his gun while trying to get into the getaway car‚ and Soto said he returned fire.";He tried to close the door‚ and he couldn';t‚"; Soto told KENS. ";That';s when he shot‚ and that';s when I returned fire‚ and they took off."; Image source: YouTube screenshotSoto shot at the ground twice after the second suspect shot at him once‚ the station said.No one inside the home was hurt‚ including Soto‚ KENS reported.Police concluded their Facebook post about the incident with a reminder: ";Remember to keep your guns locked up and lock the doors of your car.";But Soto told KENS the problem isn';t that his SUV was unlocked; rather criminals are the problem‚ and he and his family should be able to feel safe in their neighborhood no matter what precautions they take.";This is my home‚"; he told the station. ";If I wanna leave my car unlocked‚ if I wanna leave my door unlocked‚ I should be able to. The parents of these kids‚ they should be taking care of their kids and watching what they';re doing.";If you have any information about these suspects‚ police said to call 210-207-7969‚ KENS added. Homeowner shoots at two suspected thieves rummaging through car youtu.be Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Two members of a city council in southern California are facing a recall effort‚ and one of them believes that latent ";transphobia"; is partially motivating it.Ral Urea was first elected to the City Council of Calexico‚ California a city of nearly 40‚000 residents that sits along the U.S. southern border in 2020. At the time‚ he was just 23 years old and dressing in male attire. Two years later‚ Urea was re-elected‚ but rather than continue with his usual appearance‚ he began wearing makeup and low-cut dresses that expose his chest hair as a manifestation of his supposed transgender identity. Urea‚ now 26‚ prefers feminine pronouns and claims he looks ";sexy as hell"; in many personal photos that have since been shared by the media. The changes in Urea';s gender identity have coincided with steady rises in crime and homelessness in Calexico. As a result‚ he and fellow council member Gilberto Manzanarez face a recall on April 16.Statements in the voter information guide for the recall election accuse both Manzanarez and Urea of ";poor leadership"; and of voting ";to deny essential weapons to police‚ referring to the police force as too militarized and pursuing to defund our first responders."; Manzanarez is separately accused of ";unexpectedly place[ing] his campaign partner‚ Raul Urea‚ as mayor and ... taking actions that caused citizens to lose confidence in official transfers of power.";It does appear that Urea spent some time serving as mayor‚ but when his tenure as mayor began and how long it lasted are unclear.The voter guide further alleges that while in office‚ Urea has shared posts on social media that demonstrate ";open and public indecency and intoxication."; He has also failed to keep parks clean‚ address the needs of business leaders‚ ignored ";increased crime and vagrancy in downtown‚"; and accused other officials of racism and transphobia to silence ";those with differing views‚"; it said.And indeed‚ Urea has described the recall effort against him as ";tried-and-tested‚ predictable transphobia.";In his statement in the voter guide‚ Urea warns voters: ";DO NOT SIGN this dishonest and dangerous recall.";For his part‚ Manzanarez blamed the recall against him on a combination of his youth and dirty local politics. ";Its clear that this recall‚ led by candidates who lost their bid to council‚ is a political attempt to overturn the overwhelming vote of the people in the 2022 election‚"; he said.Urea agrees. ";Its as simple as power‚"; he said in a recent interview. ";Weve de-established a lot of establishment and status quo interests ingrained in the city for many decades.";However‚ the woman behind the recall‚ 58-year-old former Calexico Mayor Maritza Hurtado‚ described Manzanarez and Urea as ";disrespectful"; and ";toxic."; ";We';re losing business because people do not want to come here because it';s disgusting"; said Hurtado‚ who considers herself ";a normal Democrat.";Theyre activists with very dark intentions‚"; she added.";They are some of the biggest supporters of Black Lives Matter in Imperial County‚"; Hurtado continued. ";You guys are anti-police? We are a border city. You don';t belong here.";It';s unclear at this point whether the attempt to recall the two men from office will pass. But if it does‚ Urea said he';ll just run again. ";Its up to the people‚"; he said.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!