If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Who Gets to Document Disaster? Drones, Transparency, and The First Amendment appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

Hmmm: Longshoremen's Strike Suspended Until ... Inauguration Week

Here's One Reason Why FEMA Is Doing Such a Terrible Job

Google, for four days in a row, engulfed its Search with nine times as many articles from leftist media outlets than outlets without a predominantly leftist bias. This comes a week after the Big Tech platform attempted to dismiss an MRC Free Speech America search study as a mere one-off. This week, MRC researchers conducted the same searches for “donald trump presidential race 2024” and “kamala harris presidential race 2024” every day for four days starting Sept. 30. Google continued to flood its search results with articles from leftist media outlets and videos above former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris’s campaign websites. Altogether, Google displayed 45 articles from leftist, U.S.- and U.K.-based media outlets compared to just five without a predominantly leftist bias: NewsNation, Fox News and C-SPAN. “Google owes the MRC and the American people an apology for its election interference,” said Media Research Center Founder and President Brent Bozell. “Google has been caught misrepresenting the facts.” “”    Google’s overt leftist bias is especially concerning considering that according to a November 2023 Pew Research survey, a rising number of American adults receive their news from search. The study found that 15 percent of U.S. adults prefer to get their news from search engines, which is up from 13 percent in 2022, and 11 percent in 2021. The leftist, U.S.-based media outlets that Google credentialed by pushing them to the top of search results were as follows: The Washington Post, MSN, The New York Times, CNN, Politico, USA Today, Los Angeles Times, The Economist, The Hill, NBC News, MSNBC, Forbes, NPR, CNBC, CBS and CBS News Bay Area. The search engine also produced articles and videos from three leftist, U.K.-based outlets including The Independent, BBC and The Guardian.  Following MRC’s relentless reporting calling out Google, MRC researchers saw an incremental rise in the placement of Trump’s campaign website. On Monday, his website ranked fifth in search results; on Tuesday and Wednesday, it was third; and on Friday, it was the first result.  Nonetheless, in every instance, Google still flooded the space above Trump’s campaign website with leftist media outlets. Even when Trump’s website appeared as the first organic search result Thursday, Google piled on an avalanche of leftist news and a short blurb from the “2024 United States presidential election” Wikipedia page above his campaign website.  In contrast, when Harris’s website appeared as the first result on Wednesday, there was not a single news article above her website. Instead, there were simply three panels: one that read “2024 US elections,” one that included the date of the election day and the same snippet from the election Wikipedia page. In addition, on Monday, Wednesday and Thursday, Harris’s website appeared twice in search results. Google also favored Harris in the number of articles that appeared above each candidate's website. The search giant injected no fewer than seven articles from overwhelmingly leftist news outlets above Trump’s campaign website every day. Not once did more content appear above Harris’s website than Trump’s.  This more vivid picture of Google’s pattern of bias comes after the search giant attempted to dismiss an MRC study further in which researchers conducted the same two searches, “donald trump presidential race 2024” and “kamala harris presidential race 2024.” MRC researchers found results very similar to the ones enumerated above. Google consistently padded the top of its search results with news from outlets with a leftist bias.  Google told Fox News at the time that MRC’s study was based on a “single rare search term on a single day several weeks ago.” The Big Tech company also insisted in comments to CNBC that it “absolutely” does not manipulate results to favor candidates. But MRC has now conducted 21 additional election-related Google Search studies demonstrating a continued theme of leftist bias on the Big Tech platform.  For example, on Tuesday of this week, MRC Free Speech America published a study showing that when MRC researchers searched for “kamala harris presidential race 2024,” not a single U.S.-based news outlet rated “lean right” or “right” by media ratings firm AllSides appeared until Google placed Fox News as the fifth result on the 13th page of search results. Similarly, in a search for “donald trump presidential race 2024,” Google buried the first U.S.-based “lean right” result, a New York Post article, as the third result on the 14th page.  Similarly, on Wednesday morning, the day after the vice presidential debate, an MRC Free Speech America analysis showed that in Google News tab search for “jd vance,” 100 percent of the results the tech giant displayed came from outlets with a leftist political bias. But Google’s bias doesn’t stop there.  For the second time now, Google’s AI chatbot has refused to definitively answer questions about terrorist groups attacking Israel. When asked, “What is Hamas” or “What is Hezbollah,” Gemini instead directed MRC researchers to Google Search. Similarly, when asked if Hezbollah, a murderous terrorist organization — was “good,” the chatbot shockingly gave a nuanced response that provided some justifications for why people might consider Hezbollah a noble group. This showed very little change from last year when MRC Free Speech America Vice President, Dan Schneider found similar results. Google has a sordid history of interfering in elections as a recent MRC study showed. MRC Free Speech America researchers compiled 41 times Google was caught interfering in U.S. elections, beginning in 2008, intensifying in 2016 and continuing into 2024. MRC researchers found carefully crafted studies and numerous reports (from 2008 through February 2024) that have consistently demonstrated the tech behemoth’s election meddling. Methodology: For this report, MRC Free Speech America analyzed the Sept. 30, Oct. 1, Oct. 2  and Oct. 3 Google search results of the innocuous words “donald Trump presidential race 2024” and “kamala harris presidential race 2024.”  MRC Free Speech America created an algorithm to automate this process in a clean environment. A “clean environment” allows for organic search to populate results without the influence of prior search history and tracking cookies. 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 hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Far-left author Ta-Nehisi Coates continued his book tour on Thursday when he joined MSNBC’s Joy Reid on The ReidOut. Together, the duo would recall Coates’s trip to Senegal and lament the fact that people were doing “what, I guess, they do on the beach” outside of his hotel near an important historical landmark for the slave trade. Reid began, “I just want to start with this, kind of, you tell these three stories, and the story in Senegal was heartbreaking in that it spoke to the colonization that remained trapped in the minds of even people on the continent, which is not something black folks think about. Talk about experiencing that.”     As Coates was speaking, MSNBC put up photos of the House of Slaves museum and memorial on the Senegalese island of Gorée just off of the capital city of Dakar, where it is believed by some that over a million enslaved people passed through before being loaded onto slave ships. With that as background, Coates replied, “Yeah, you know, I mean, one of the things I say toward the end of the book is I didn't get my adult passport until I was 37 years old, oddly enough the same year The Case for Reparations was published, and obviously because of that, you know, I went to Africa relatively late. In fact, travel and international travel for me was largely, like, I guess a lot of people, enjoyment, vacation, and I put off this trip back home, as they say, and I put it off because I knew it wasn't going to be a vacation.” Coates added, “And in fact, what it turned out to be was a kind of pilgrimage, a confrontation with images of myself, images of ourselves as black folks, and really ultimately, I would have to say a mourning.” For her part, Reid concurred, “It is. And I think having been there and done a, sort of, version of that in Ghana, you have, there's a sorrow to it, and there's a deep sort of, there’s almost something kind of offensive about the idea that it's tourism, you know, for people to do. Coates was relieved someone agreed, “Oh, my god. You know, I was in this hotel. I'm glad to hear you say that. I feel bad about it, but I was in this hotel, and it was right on the beach. I would walk out and I would see people doing what, I guess, they do on the beach and I looked at them like they were out of their minds.” Reid recalled, “Out of their—I did the same,” as Coates continued, “Because, you know, to us, it's not a beach, right? It’s not a beach.” The pair agreed that “it’s a tomb.” If the Senegalese government wanted to turn the whole island into a memorial, they could, but have chosen not to, no doubt, in part, because over 1,600 people live there. Is Coates trying to shame them for going to the beach? What about the Senegalese vacationers themselves? Should people who visit the Normandy beaches be perpetually dour even when they are not at the memorials? Reid then claimed, “And so the way that I kind of married that part to the second part of your book is that you then have people fighting the history that Africa is the start of, right? You get to South Carolina and people say, 'No, we don't want that history, we don't want the 1619 Project. We want denial.'” Nobody who criticizes the 1619 Project is denying slavery, just like nobody who goes to the beach is denying slavery. Here is a transcript for the October 3 show: MSNBC The ReidOut 10/3/2024 7:34 PM ET JOY REID: I just want to start with this, kind of, you tell these three stories, and the story in Senegal was heartbreaking in that it spoke to the colonization that remained trapped in the minds of even people on the continent, which is not something black folks think about. Talk about experiencing that. TA-NEHISI COATES: Yeah, you know, I mean, one of the things I say toward the end of the book is I didn't get my adult passport until I was 37 years old, oddly enough the same year The Case for Reparations was published, and obviously because of that, you know, I went to Africa relatively late. In fact, travel and international travel for me was largely, like, I guess a lot of people, enjoyment, vacation, and I put off this trip back home, as they say, and I put it off because I knew it wasn't going to be a vacation.  And in fact, what it turned out to be was a kind of pilgrimage, a confrontation with images of myself, images of ourselves as black folks, and really ultimately, I would have to say a mourning. REID: It is. And I think having been there and done a, sort of, version of that in Ghana, you have, there's a sorrow to it, and there's a deep sort of, there’s almost something kind of offensive about the idea that it's tourism, you know, for people to do. COATES: Oh, my god. You know, I was in this hotel. I'm glad to hear you say that. I feel bad about it, but I was in this hotel, and it was right on the beach. I would walk out and I would see people doing what, I guess, they do on the beach— REID: Yes. COATES:  —  and I looked at them like they were out of their minds.  REID: Out of their—I did the same. COATES: Because, you know, to us, it's not a beach, right? It’s not a beach. REID: It’s not a beach. It’s a tomb. COATES: Yes, it’s a tomb. REID: And so the way that I kind of married that part to the second part of your book is that you then have people fighting the history that Africa is the start of, right?   COATES: That's right.   REID: You get to South Carolina and people say, “No, we don't want that history, we don't want the 1619 Project. We want denial.”

Even after the second assassination attempt on former President Trump, the liberal ladies of ABC’s The View had refused to tone down their incendiary rhetoric. But, during Friday’s show, fake Republican Ana Navarro actually turned up the rhetoric to a very dangerous level. According to her, Trump was not a “normal human being,” but rather “an existential threat to humanity and democracy.” Her disgusting dehumanization of Trump was spurred on by former Republican Congresswoman Liz Cheney’s endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris. The ABC News co-host sympathized with how hard the decision was: “So, I voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016. It was the first time I voted for a Democrat and it was a very difficult thing to do. Because when politics has been such a part of your profession, of your social circle, of your family life, it really is a very hard thing to do.” Navarro went on to declare that policy differences were not allowed to be discussed this election cycle because a non-human, existential threat was on the ballot: NAVARRO: we can have policy differences. You can have policy differences with Kamala. You can have policy differences with Liz Cheney. We are not at a point right now to be talking about policy differences. This is not about economic difference. Because we are not running against a normal human being. HOSTIN: Right! NAVARRO: We are running against Donald Trump who is an existential threat to humanity and democracy.     The context around Navarro’s comments made things even worse. Shortly before she made her dangerous assertions, pretend moderate Sara Haines declared: “When we speak of Donald Trump, we are not speaking in hyperbole or elevated rhetoric, we are speaking in facts.” Earlier in the week, co-host Sunny Hostin claimed Trump was a Nazi who was literally planning a second Kristallnacht. She also claimed we will "not have elections after this election if the former president wins." Not speaking in hyperbole or elevated rhetoric? Who could tell? The View cast was also really desperate to have Republican vote for Harris. “Do it this one time. Vote for the Democrat to save the country. Listen to Liz Cheney. When everything goes back to normal, then become a Republican again…” Friday moderator Joy Behar begged. Haines paraphrased Cheney in insisting that the Republican Party was “dying” and somehow the only way to save it was voting for Democrats: But that party is dying and being co-opted by an extreme MAGA nationalist-wing that doesn't fit everyone. So, if you love that party, if you have conservative beliefs and you want that to be represented again you have to vote for Kamala Harris to save it. And I thought that was so effective last night. Behar rambled on about how Americans needed to “meet this moment” and vote for Harris. “This moment, I mean we have been in trouble over the centuries. Slavery was almost going to take hold again after it was done. And this is another moment in time where just vote the right way this time because meet the moment,” she proclaimed. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View October 4, 2024 11:06:35 a.m. Eastern (…) SARA HAINES: I think Liz Cheney made it very clear that there's only one option when you fill out your ballot in November for two major reasons. So, if you're a Republican or an independent struggling to vote for Vice President Harris, I thought she spelled out so perfectly that, when we speak of Donald Trump, we are not speaking in hyperbole or elevated rhetoric, we are speaking in facts. And the facts she laid out so smoothly in her speech last night, she also pointed out are not from his rivals, are not from other parties. They are from his inner circle, his cabinet, his campaign. That's what she was quoting to show you that this isn't the other side saying this, this is his people saying this. And then, the second reason I thought it was so important is, she reminded us there that are people with conservative values and beliefs and she is one of them. But that party is dying and being co-opted by an extreme MAGA nationalist-wing that doesn't fit everyone. So, if you love that party, if you have conservative beliefs and you want that to be represented again you have to vote for Kamala Harris to save it. And I thought that was so effective last night. ANA NAVARRO: So, let me tell you. So, I voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016. It was the first time I voted for a Democrat and it was a very difficult thing to do. Because when politics has been such a part of your profession, of your social circle, of your family life, it really is a very hard thing to do. SUNNY HOSTIN: You lost friends because of that. NAVARRO: And they can go away. [Laughter and applause] They lost me. HOSTIN: They lost you. [Crosstalk] NAVARRO: But let me finish my point, please. So, I want us to recognize just how hard what she did is. And Liz Cheney has been paying a price for standing on principle since January 6. This is a woman who could have been like Elise Stefanik. This is a woman who could be like Nancy Mace and changed everything she believed and she could still be in Congress and she could still be in Republican leadership – hell, she might be speaker right now. But instead, she chose principle. She chose having a backbone. She chose democracy. And I think we need to thank her for that. I'm also incredibly impressed by what Kamala Harris is doing. She has said that she's going to be the president for all Americans and think of the coalition she's building. She's got Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on the left, she's got Liz Cheney on the right, she’s got Bernie Sanders on the left, she’s got Dick Cheney on the right. Who would have thunk there was a tent big enough to fit all of those! So, I think Kamala is being very consistent to what she said she would do. JOY: I would say to those Republicans out there who are sitting on the fence, just do it this one time. Do it this one time. Vote for the Democrat to save the country. Listen to Liz Cheney. When everything goes back to normal, then become a Republican again like Alyssa will become and probably – HAINES: Kamala said, the day for a two-party system will come back. ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: I’m still a Republican. NAVARRO: But listen, the thing is this: we can have policy differences. You can have policy differences with Kamala. You can have policy differences with Liz Cheney. We are not at a point right now to be talking about policy differences. This is not about economic difference. Because we are not running against a normal human being. HOSTIN: Right! NAVARRO: We are running against Donald Trump who is an existential threat to humanity and democracy. [Applause] ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: I do want to say though, I am still a Republican and I don't believe -- I don't believe it's my job to tell people how to vote but to give them the facts. And I have facts having worked closely with him that they just may not know. I feel that's my duty to the country. And I think – allow the chips to fall where they may. People will decide how they vote. But that's what I'm going to do. BEHAR: This is the part that stood out from what she said, to me, ‘I ask you will of you here and everyone listening across the great country to join us. I ask you to meet this moment.” This moment, I mean we have been in trouble over the centuries. Slavery was almost going to take hold again after it was done. And this is another moment in time where just vote the right way this time because meet the moment. (…)

Former Jan. 6 committee member Liz Cheney suggested in August 2020 that Kamala Harris was "a radical liberal who wants to raise your taxes, take away your guns and your health insurance, explode the size of our federal government and give it control over every aspect of our lives. She would recreate America in the image of what we've seen on the streets of Portland and Seattle. We won't give her the chance." On Thursday, Cheney urged voters in Wisconsin to give Harris a chance. Addressing a crowd in Ripon, Cheney said that she and Harris are "bound together by the one thing that matters to us as Americans more than any other. And that's our duty to our Constitution." Cheney, apparently willing to now overlook Harris' difficulties with various amendments in the Constitution, suggested further that the border czar would "defend the rule of law," "unite this nation," and "inspire all of our children." When asked about Cheney's endorsement of the vice president, President Donald Trump did not hold back, telling a reporter, "Liz Cheney lost for Congress. She was terrible. ... Liz Cheney is a stupid war hawk. All she wants to do is shoot missiles at people." Trump suggested further that the endorsement is not the flex the Harris campaign figures it for, stating, "I think they hurt each other. I think they're so bad, both of them." Cheney lost by a landslide in the Republican primary on Aug. 16, 2022. Trump-backed Rep. Harriet Hageman (R-Wyo.) secured 66.3% of the vote. Cheney went home with less than 29% of the vote. While Cheney's work on House Democrats' Jan. 6 committee helped her alienate voters, it became clear over time that she was only nominally conservative. Conservative Review assigned Cheney a Liberty Score of only 51%. After all, she voted: to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and require the federal government and all states to recognize the validity of homosexual "marriages"; to extend chain migration to adult dependents of employment visa holders; in support of gun control; to fund the Biden-Harris administration's vaccine mandates; to sign women up for the draft; to squash debate on American involvement in a foreign war; and to give up on the border wall. Trump continued bashing Cheney on Truth Social Thursday, writing, "Liz Cheney lost her Congressional Seat by the largest margin in the history of Congress for a sitting Representative. The people of Wyoming are really smart! She is a low IQ War Hawk that, as a member of the J6 Unselect Committee of Political Hacks and Thugs, ILLEGALLY DESTROYED & DELETED all documents, information, and evidence." The Republican similarly trashed the former congresswoman's father, former Vice President Dick Cheney, noting that he was "a leader of our ridiculous journey into the Middle East, where Trillions of Dollars were spent, millions of people were killed - and for what? NOTHING!"Former Vice President Dick Cheney, who championed the invasion of Iraq at the cost of thousands of U.S. service lives and trillions of dollars, endorsed Harris last month, stating, "In our nation's 248-year history, there has never been an individual who is a greater threat to our republic than Donald Trump." 'Liz Cheney was willing to kill thousands of your children.' "Well, today, these two fools, because the Republican Party no longer wants them, endorsed the most Liberal Senator in the U.S. Senate, further Left than even Pocahontas or Crazy Bernie Sanders — Lyin' Kamala Harris," wrote Trump. "What a pathetic couple that is, both suffering gravely from Trump Derangement Syndrome. Good Luck to them both!" The president's remarks resembled in substance those shared by his running mate early last month. Cheney revealed during a "fireside chat" in early September at Duke University's Sanford School of Public Policy that she would be voting for Harris "because of the danger that Donald Trump poses." Blaze News previously reported that when confronted that same week with Cheney's remarks, Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) said, "This is a person whose entire career has been about sending other people's children off to fight and die for her military conflicts and her ridiculous ideas that somehow, we were going to turn Afghanistan — a country that doesn't even have running water in a lot of places — into a thriving liberal democracy." "And for that, Liz Cheney was willing to kill thousands of your children," added Vance. "I think it's the best thing in the world that she's supporting Kamala Harris," continued Trump's running mate. "Kamala Harris and Liz Cheney make very, very interesting partners. They get rich when America's sons and daughters go off to die. They get rich when America loses wars instead of winning wars. And they get rich when America gets weaker in the world." On Thursday, Kamala Harris said of Cheney's endorsement, "Liz Cheney stands in the finest traditions of its leaders." "The president of the United States must not look at our country through the narrow lens of ideology or petty partisanship or self-interest," continued the vice president. "In the face of those who would endanger our magnificent experiment, people of every party must stand together." Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Cracks are beginning to show in Harris' inner circle, as evidenced by recent leaks to the liberal press. The cause appears to be Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz's numerous bald-faced lies — or what Politico has euphemistically referred to as "verbal errors" and "problem[s] misspeaking." Four individuals in Harris' camp spoke anonymously to Politico, indicating that despite the vetting process, they were blindsided by some of Walz's more egregious whoppers, such as his repeated yarn about being in Hong Kong during the infamous massacre at Tiananmen Square in 1989. Walz "misspoke" at length, for instance, during a congressional hearing in 2014, claiming, "[The Tiananmen Square massacre] certainly had enduring influence on me. As a young man I was just going to teach high school in Foshan in Guangdong province and was in Hong Kong in May 1989. As the events were unfolding, several of us went in. I still remember the train station in Hong Kong." 'I will get caught up in the rhetoric.' During the vice presidential debate, moderator Margaret Brennan asked, "You said you were in Hong Kong during the deadly Tiananmen Square protest in the spring of 1989, but Minnesota Public Radio and other media outlets are reporting that you actually didn't travel to Asia until August of that year. Can you explain that discrepancy?" After providing Brennan with an unsolicited and scattered biography, Walz said, "I've not been perfect, and I'm a knucklehead at times, but it's always been about that." Walz added, "I will talk a lot, I will get caught up in the rhetoric, but being there, the impact it made, the difference in my life. I learned a lot about China." When asked once again to bridge the chasm between reality and his account, Walz suggested he "misspoke." "It's unclear whether Walz's verbal errors will undercut his credibility with voters. But the need to continually clean up those claims could politically hurt Walz and Harris," reported Politico. Since the debate, Walz has been trying to smooth over the waves his most recently discovered falsehoods have caused, reassuring reporters in Pennsylvania, for instance, "Look, I have my dates wrong." Walz is not the only Democrat desperately scrambling to limit the damage his mouth has done. Once the truth came out about the governor's military record and retiring rank, the Harris campaign reportedly had to revise Walz's biography. Whereas it previously listed the governor as a "retired command sergeant major," it was adjusted to indicate that Walz once held the command sergeant major rank — a critical distinction, granted he reverted back to the rank of master sergeant after failing to complete the necessary coursework. 'He sometimes misspeaks.' Politico noted that the Harris campaign also felt compelled to claim Walz "misspoke" when he said in 2018 that he didn't want "those weapons of war, that I carried in war" accessible to law-abiding Americans. Of course, Walz never served in combat, having bailed out of the service around the time his battalion received word it would soon be deployed to Iraq. When Walz was exposed for lying about "us[ing] I.V.F. to start a family," having actually used intrauterine insemination to have children, Lauren Hitt, a spokeswoman for the Harris campaign, once again used the magic word, claiming Walz "misspoke." Walz also appears to have misspoken when he falsely claimed: in his 2005 congressional campaign biography that he was "named the Outstanding Young Nebraskan by the Nebraska Chamber of Commerce for his service in the education, military, and small business communities"; that over 80% of schoolchildren in Minnesota didn't miss more than 10 days of school during the pandemic; that Project 2025 calls for the tracking of "all pregnancies" and would require women "to register with a new federal agency" upon conception; and that his son witnessed a shooting, having actually been inside a nearby recreation center at the time the episode occurred outdoors. "Any time you are forced to go off message is never welcome," Mike Mikus, a Democratic strategist in Pennsylvania, told Politico. "But in the end, voters are looking for somebody who is more concerned about what these candidates are going to do to improve their lives than, 'Did he get every single fact correct.'" The campaign appears to be left with little other option that to recycle this word and insinuate that Walz's ostensibly pathological disregard for the truth is evidence of his normalcy. "As the governor has said, he sometimes misspeaks," a spokesman for the campaign told Politico. "He speaks like a normal person and speaks passionately about issues he cares deeply about including democracy and stopping gun violence in our school." In a desperate projection effort, the spokesman suggested Trump and Vance "repeatedly lie and mislead about their plan to ban abortion nationwide" and other topics. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Kamala Harris just announced that Hurricane Helene victims can apply to FEMA for a whopping $750 to buy necessities, proving once again that Americans come last in this country. “How many billions have gone overseas? ... How many hundreds of millions have we sent over to Ukraine?” asks Glenn Beck, adding that American tax dollars are also “paying for some of [Ukraine's] small businesses to stay open” as well as for the country’s “social security.” Further, “Migrants got $2,500,” as well as “a free cell phone” plus “food and water and housing.” But “750 big ones can be yours. All you have to have is just no house, no job, no roads, no schools for your kids,” Glenn mocks, pointing out the obvious disregard for American citizens, whose tax dollars are squandered on everything but American needs. - YouTube www.youtube.com As for FEMA’s claim that it’s running out of money, Glenn doesn’t buy it. “First of all, you're the United States government. You're never out of money; you just print more. You're doing that all over the planet,” he says. “You have three states that have had whole sections wiped out. You have people trapped in the mountains without any food, water, electricity, phone service. God only knows how many people are dying still today.” And yet, when the National Guard was requested, the first response given was “we’ve sent the National Guard overseas.” While the National Guard has since been called in and is assisting hurricane-stricken states, Glenn is horrified at the lack of regard for suffering Americans. “There are other states that also have a National Guard,” he points out. “What they're doing to the people here in America — who they're supposed to work for and serve — is so offensive.” The government’s response to Hurricane Helene is so deeply troubling that Glenn says there is really only one thing we can do — and it’s an incredibly powerful act of faith. To hear it, watch the clip above. Want more from Glenn Beck?To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

POLITICO DRAGGED for Claiming Tim Walz Misspeaks (Did Kamala's Circle MEAN to Throw Him Under the Bus?!)